FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE from Modern to Global Space ARCHITECTURE from FABRICATING from Modern to Global Space VOLUME I (THESIS)

António Alberto Duarte Lopes Fernandes Correia António VOLUME I (THESIS) VOLUME

António Alberto Lopes Fernandes Duarte Correia

FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE From Modern to Global Space ARCHITECTURE From FABRICATING From Modern to Global Space VOLUME I (THESIS)

Tese de Doutoramento em Arquitectura, orientada pelos Professor Doutor Luís Simões da Silva e Professor Doutor Vítor Murtinho e apresentada ao Departamento de Arquitectura da Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade de Coimbra

Dezembro de 2017

Bolsa SFRH/BD/65732/2009:

António Lopes Correia FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE From Modern to Global Space VOLUME I (THESIS)

PhD thesis in Architecture, advised by Prof. Dr. Luís Simões da Silva and Prof. Dr. Vítor Murtinho and presented to the Department of Architecture of the Faculty of Sciences and Technology of the University of Coimbra

December 2017

à Sofia e ao Jorge

Table of Contents

AGRADECIMENTOS —11 RESUMO —13 ABSTRACT —15

INTRODUCTION —17

I A MECHANISTIC INHERITANCE —25 1 Industrialization and the housing problem: Architecture’s foundations through modernism —27 1.1 Echoes of a Cartesian space and time —27 1.2 The establishment of a modernist architecture through CIAM —31 1.3 The housing problem in the modernist formulation —33 1.4 Convolutions of a modernist science —36 1.5 CIAM dismissal towards a new modernity —40 2 Engaged structures in a (post)modern world: Concepts, trends, forms and alterities —45 2.1 Structuralism, semiotics and significance —45 2.1.1 Language and semiotics —45 2.1.2 Building meaning —51 2.2 Research trends of a structuralist affinity [vernacular, natural, normative, numerical] —59 2.3 Structuralist related forms —66 2.4 Alterity in architectural production —72 3 Taxonomic landscapes: (Re)mapping architecture’s structures —81 3.1 A general notion of systems —82 3.2 Type and architecture —87 3.2.1 A kin order of type —87 3.2.2 An enlightened type —88 3.2.3 Characteristics and limitations —90 3.2.4 A rationale of type —92 3.2.5 Using and understanding types —95 3.3 A discrete view of architectural production —98 3.3.1 Matter, craft and reason —99 3.3.2 Space, time and network —101 3.3.3 Systems and shearing layers —104 II (PRE)FABRICATING ARCHITECTURE —109 1 A prefabrication terminology —111 1.1 (Post)industrial architectural production —111 1.2 An evolutionary view of lightweight dry construction practices —116 1.3 Towards a prefabrication definition —120 2 From the modernist industrial paradigms to a networked reality —127 2.1 A business reality —127 2.2 Notes from the automotive industry —130 2.3 Notes from the aerospace industry —133 2.4 Notes from the shipbuilding industry —135 2.5 Comparison and challenges towards housing production —137 3 Prefabrication and variability —141 3.1 Logistics and output vectors —141 3.2 Mass-production and mass-customization —144 3.3 Notes towards variability in prefabrication of houses —148 4 Modularity —153 4.1 A modularity context —153 4.2 Defining modules and modularity —154 4.2.1 A system’s perspective —154 4.2.2 Types of modularity —155 4.2.3 Functional mapping —156 4.2.4 Interfaces —157 4.2.5 Coupling and decoupling —159 4.2.6 Measures of modularity —160 4.2.7 An example —163 4.3 Notes on modularity and architectural production —166 4.3.1 Modular knowledgeability —166 4.3.2 Modularity and variability —166 4.3.3 Change and obsolescence —167 4.3.4 Implementing a modular architecture —170 4.3.5 Modularity and architectural form —172 5 A practical case: The Affordable Houses Project —175 5.1 Background —175 5.2 Preliminary remarks on the affordability concept —178 5.3 The AHP design system —180 5.3.1 Main conceptual lines —180 5.3.2 Setting initial modular constraints —181 5.3.3 The original AHP design system —183 5.3.4 An illustrative design case —186 5.4 Optimizing the design system —189 5.4.1 Expanding the grid —189 5.4.2 Definitions and formalisms of modular shapes —191 5.4.3 Tackling dependencies —195 5.4.4 Outlining a minimum combinable unit —198 5.4.5 Improving symmetry and beyond —201 5.4.6 Light and ventilation constraints —204 5.4.7 Theoretical grid constraints —207 5.4.8 Establishing a minimum circulation —207 5.4.9 Functional mapping strategies —210 5.4.10 The multistory building —215 5.5 The prototype —219 5.5.1 Modularity, construction and sustainability —219 5.5.2 Building the prototype —220 5.6 Revisiting the prototype —226 5.6.1 The company —226 5.6.2 The prototype —227

III PRACTICAL CONCLUSIONS ON A (PRE)FABRICATED ARCHITECTURE —231 1 On an idea of prefabrication —231 2 Territorial considerations —232 3 Economy and value —232 4 Commercial considerations —233 5 Clients’ bias, resistances and preconceptions —234 6 Clients’ attractiveness factors —235 7 People and the construction industry —236 8 The public and the architect —237 9 Technical considerations —238 10 Lightweight prefab issues —239 11 Architectural production and industrial paradigms —241 12 Modularity, change and variability —242 13 Impacting design performance —245 14 Future work —246

IV EPISTEMOLOGICAL NOTES [A GLOBAL EPILOGUE] —247 1 Globalization’s semiotic paradox —249 2 Space-time shifts —251 3 A global architecture factory —255 4 Architecture, media and the masses —261 5 Shifts in the profession —267 6 Crisis, conflict and empowerment —271 7 Closure —277

BIBLIOGRAPHY —281 TABLE OF ACRONYMS —303 TABLE OF FIGURES —305 TABLE OF TABLES —307 REFERENCES —309

Agradecimentos

Quero começar por agradecer aos meus orientadores, Professor Luís Simões da Silva e Professor Vítor Murtinho, pelo apoio dado na investigação que conduziu a esta tese. Quero também agradecer aos amigos e companheiros desta ou de outras aventuras à volta da arquitetura (e não só), como o Filipe Costa, o Rui Santos, o César Cerqueira e o Hélder Ferreira. Quero também agradecer à Cláudia Pinto pelas boas conversas. Por fim, que é o princípio, quero agradecer à minha família. Aos meus pais, por quem sou, irmã e tia Prazeres. Aos meus amores, a minha casa, Sofia e Jorge.

Resumo

Esta tese estabelece uma visão modular da pré-fabricação sob uma perspetiva da produção arquite- tónica. É fundamentada tanto de um ponto de vista taxonómico, delineado de uma herança modernista, com o problema da habitação como veículo principal, e de um ponto de vista estruturalista, delineado a partir de elementos linguístico/semióticos, constituintes essenciais de processos socioculturais. Pretende esclarecer vínculos entre a produção arquitetónica e uma esfera industrial na abordagem dos requisitos contemporâneos da habitação, favorecendo modelos de alteridade (e.g., implementando flexibilidade ou abordagens de adaptabilidade) em detrimento de modelos de controlo mais rígidos (e.g., propostas fun- cionalistas) e endossando uma égide modular. A partir daí, propõe-se um contributo mais geral para o debate sobre o papel da arquitetura num mundo globalizado, na sua inevitável evolução epistemológica para um lugar diferente, (re)fabricando-se. Assim, num nível mais abrangente, esta tese é sobre a obser- vação da pré-fabricação de habitação como um caso particular do que poderá ser o diálogo epistemológico da arquitetura com o estado tecnológico e o paradigma informacional de um mundo globalizado. Na origem desta tese está um desenvolvimento prático de um caso de estudo de prefabricação de habitação para fins residenciais de baixa ou média densidade habitacional, com recurso a uma filosofia estrutural ligeira. De forma direta e indireta, esse caso contribuiu para resultados concretos, como a criação de uma empresa de construção pré-fabricada, um protótipo de habitação em escala real e uma patente registada sobre construção modular. Todavia, o trabalho inicial suscitou várias perplexidades, nomeadamente na relação histórica entre a prática arquitetónica com métodos pré-fabricados e no que parece ser uma sujeição a um preconceito social, ou na validade de alguns discursos arquitetónicos em face às idiossincrasias de algumas práticas construtivas [aparentemente] inovadoras. Esse questiona- mento manifesta-se numa revisão crítica do caso de estudo inicial, que coloca um foco em aspetos de sistematização de processos de produção arquitetónica, mas também em todo o seu enquadramento e contextualização histórica, teórica e crítica. Parte desta tese tem, pois, intuitos metodológicos no que concerne uma clarificação da lógica que levou aos desenvolvimentos tangíveis iniciais (construção do protótipo, etc.). Além disso, constitui um esforço para relacionar um discurso arquitetónico com uma prática onde uma semântica de pré-fabricação desejavelmente possa ocorrer com desassombro.

Abstract

This thesis lays a modular insight on prefabrication from an architectural production perspective. It is grounded both from a taxonomic standpoint, outlined from the modernist architecture inheritance, with the housing problem as main vehicle, and from a semiotic, structuralist standpoint, outlined from the linguistic/semiotic socio-cultural building blocks. It aims to clarify bonds between architectural production and an industrial sphere in the addressing of contemporary house requirements, favoring alterity models (e.g. enacting flexibility or adaptability approaches) in detriment of more rigid control models (e.g. functionalist proposals), and endorsing a modular aegis. From there, a more general contribution is proposed to the debate about the role of architecture in a globalized world, in its inevitable epistemological evolution to a different place, re-fabricating itself. Thus, on a broader level, this thesis is about observing house prefabrication as a particular case of what can be architecture’s epistemological dialogue with the technological state and informational paradigm of a globalized world. On the origin of this thesis is a practical development of a case-study of house prefabrication for residential purposes with low or medium density, making use of a lightweight structural philosophy. Directly and indirectly, the case has contributed to real-world outputs such as the creation of a prefab construction company, building a real-scale house prototype, and a registered patent on modular construction. The initial work has nonetheless ignited several perplexities, namely in the historical relation of architectural practice with prefab methods and what it seems a subjection to social bias, or in the validity of some architectural discourses facing the idiosyncrasies of some seemingly innovative constructive practices. This questioning is manifested in a critical revision of the original case- study, particularly focusing on systematization aspects of the architectural production, but also in its historical, theoretical and critical framing. Thus, part of this thesis constitutes a clarification of the rationale that has led to the tangible developments (prototype construction and so forth), which is set with methodological purposes. Additionally, it constitutes an effort to bind architectural discourse with a practice where a prefab semantics can have a dauntless, unbiased existence.

16 Introduction

1 An ongoing epistemological debate

Born out of the growing pains of industrialization, the modernist period and its CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne) counterpart would signal a remarkable epistemological change in architecture. With it, in brief, favorable conditions were set to bring architecture to the masses, and not so much as a privilege of some elites. The process occurs bonded with a strong focus in addressing the housing problem and correlated urban planning issues. The moment demanded both a rationalizing spirit, and a compliant cast of a new formal and conceptual vocabulary, with inputs coming from multiple sources, from arts to sciences, from industry to nature or vernacular built forms. To a certain extent, this resulted in a clash with previous architectural conceptions, as it was notorious with a prevailing Beaux-Arts criticism. Anyhow, this was a central formative period for the architecture we have today. Namely, it was through its proponents that architecture arguably made its first serious, extensive effort to think itself outside the inevitability of form, that is, (proto)scientifically, through functionalism and the like. None- theless, in our days the context has changed, modernism has long undergone a review process, and an information age has been installed. With his announcement of the end of the Gutenberg galaxy, in an early reflection on our global age, Marshall McLuhan1 hammered one more nail to Victor Hugo’s ceci tuera cela2. But still, the clash that modernism represents from the previous architectural conceptions remains referential to acknowledge what it seems to be an age-old, permanent epistemological debate. There is an inherent open-endedness, or ambiguity, in a general definition of architecture’s object, which can cross wholly different scales/scopes. Moreover, since the rise of the discipline of industrial design, in the early XXth century, many different areas of design have been specializing, and many have been created just in the past decades bonded to IT’s (Information Technologies), signaling the inevitability of ever more setting collaborative practices, and so forth. Likewise, the work in objects of a virtual sphere, first as an extension of the work in a physical reality, and then as objects in their own

right, contributed to change the game. These are just some examples of the many relatively recent aspects contributing to accelerate the change of what has been traditionally perceived as the architect’s role, and architecture’s object both in its production and theorization, indelibly expanding their scope to such a breadth that one can easily loose track. Perhaps prophetically, or perhaps simply signaling an antient raison d’être, in 1968, Hans Hollein was making a funeral eulogy: “All are architects. Everything is architecture”3. Even so, and aside its open-endedness and evolution throughout the times, we believe that, in the least, architecture’s humanistic relevance cannot easily vanish. If a certain mechanistic realm was already underway when architectural modernism was in ebulli- tion, the issue gained new contours and relevance with the arousal of a review of the modernist ideas (and ideals). The latter occurred in the mid XXth century, when there is a general accusation of a certain emptiness, or inadequate orthodoxy, of modernity’s forms, and a corresponding attempt to instill deeper levels of significance. This kind of perspective was notably expressed by figures such as Aldo Van Eyck and some of his contemporaries in the aftermath of CIAM. However, in a post- modern(ist) stance, some others, such as Robert Venturi, would also be accused of focusing too much in the signification issues, with too much of rhetoric, historic, or semiotic concerns. Finally, theorists, such as Giorgio Grassi, have pointed to what may appear to be a more consensual way somewhere in between, where architecture could be regarded as a rational discipline, seeking order, a place where rigor and coherence should be the ultimate modes of expression—“in architecture, the absence of order becomes materially impossible”4. The latter view values reason above form, giving no room for aesthetical or moral indulgences, so to avoid rhetorical and formalist approaches to architectural production. In this sense, architecture would ought to be a discipline finding sense among itself, through a logic of the praxis, and not through methodological adoptions of other fields. That raises a pertinent, but perhaps unanswerable question of a procedural order. On the other hand, it is a view that underlies architecture’s autonomy through its techniques and forms. However, these cannot be conceived as occurring by uncritically repeating gestures and approaches, since these are necessarily subjected to conditions and signification building processes that change overtime5. Instead, as genetic relatives, these will most likely evolve through the praxis, while somewhat preserving the traces that originated it. Notwithstanding, in current conditions it is seemingly harder and harder to keep track of the meme carried techniques and forms, as they expand and mingle at an amazing speed, often blurring to the point of unrecognition. Moreover, in last resort, a purely rational architectural way of thinking, as it could radically be interpreted from such a call for order, would mean that there was not necessarily an architectural object implied, at least not one that we would consider as so—in a pure rational milieu, that would lead to a logical dead-end, where everything would be possible, but impractical, since ultimately the [architectural] artifact would become the thought of the artifact and not the artifact

itself, and recursively so forth. In last resort, pure rationality eliminates any trace of bond with a tangible reality, with forms self-referenced to previous forms, lost in a ouroboros serpent of pure topology, not allowing the imperfectness of reality to engage towards a production of meaning or a real-world concretion, thus a dead language6. Anyhow, the architecture that we address here is not exclusively of a systematic order as in a Kantian architectonic, but eminently deals with material things [complement with: Annex, I.1 Architecture: An etymological draft]. At first, the idea of house prefabrication may seem to be off this discussion. However, there are several parallelisms implied. For instance, we can point to what may be considered a generally suspicious scrutiny from the architectural community towards this often accused of empty mode of bringing forms to life, and the way architectural modernism has been regarded at some point by its critics, as somewhat vacant of meaning production. Additionally, the idea of prefabrication that is often assumed by most people is a lot closer to the contemporary idea of product, which can conflict with the notions of place that archetypally pervade the architectural conceptions of space and time. Be- sides, by limiting the observation of prefabrication to its cases in house production, although in a specific context, we are revisiting the home, the quintessential architectural object of study since Vitruvius, the minimum unit for a socially signifying impact.

2 Prefabrication between the factory of modernity and a global space

Directly or indirectly, the Industrial Revolution had a profound impact on architectural production, to which we can associate a modern conception of space of a Cartesian matrix. With the Infor- mation Revolution, there was a new shift towards a space of relativistic (or relational) nature, whose mapping requires different logics of analysis. Thus, after a hierarchical, gravitational logic, inherited from Vitruvius, and pursued by the moderns’, it would now make sense to think of a heterarchical, networked and relational logic. Despite this, the architecture we are making today is, to a large extent, an architecture of modernist heritage, in which a more or less rigid control of space overlaps with what would be a logic closer to our times, where there is (or should be) freedom of use, of choice, of change, of dwelling, … of thinking. To a certain extent, it is the machine, real and metaphorical, that subsists as one of the central elements uniting these two civilizational times. It is to the machine that the modernist parents also sought inspiration, translated into an aspiration to change the conditions of life through the built environment, the dwelling and the city, as eloquently expressed by the CIAM. It is also to the machine that we can, albeit partially, associate the introduction of new formal conjectures of that epoch, where aspects such as function and economy were seen as superlative aspirations to translate into architectural form. It is with the machine that information is nowadays processed and transmitted seemingly

instantly, allowing new ways of working, of producing, of relating to each other… of living. It is also with the machine, now increasingly dematerialized, that a certain symbolic and iconographic side trans- lates into a ubiquitous dissemination of brands, marketing strategies or other modes related to a generalized commodification of goods or services, vehicles par excellence of a consumer society. These lead to an indelible control of the architectural space-time by a sphere of consumption that is primarily regulated by global mechanisms of capital, and where architecture itself is used as a manip- ulator vehicle at the service of what it also seems to be a global capitalist ideology. In this perspective, desires and aspirations are inculcated in a spatial user who is primarily a consumer. These modify the conception of the productive machine, which thus leaves a sphere of strict constraint to the canonical brute force of mass-production and opens itself to the possibilities of other forms and methods that allow a scalable variability, that moreover can be algorithmically established. Therefore, despite common traits—e.g. human intelligence, creativity and spatial action, or constraint to the Newtonian gravitational condition—it also changes the paradigm of space-time control, and with it, inexorably, is architecture itself that changes once more. As a discursive object in architectural circles, prefabrication peaks in a modernist context. How- ever, circumstances have changed, architecture’s production modes have evolved, as have its observation modes and its very objects of analysis. Nonetheless, despite the changes and an inevitable fragmentation of a modernist narrative, a certain notion of prefabrication has subsisted, often scarred by misconceptions or equivocal connotations. Early on, prefabrication appears as one of the arrows pointing to a path of progress and positivist belief of an industrial era. More or less local materials and modes of building, leave their founding place, and new materials, technologies, and production methods emerge, transforming the ancestral architectural modes of intervening, that had archetypally been based on a patient dialogue with their close environment. The sphere of the natural and vernacular—an organic evolutionary consistency—is progressively abandoned, and it is moved towards the construction of a taxonomical, abstracting and typifying reality—a numerical consistency—in which the scale of production becomes the superlative mantra, it too pointing to increasingly global processes. The (hi)story of prefabrication is itself a global history. Furthermore, it is a history whose outlines go beyond what is typically considered architecture’s field of action, and in this aspect, it has become the target of both prejudice and acclaim. On the one hand, a relationship with the means of industrial production has been looked upon with fascination by some. On the other hand, it seems to be apart of an official architectural history in the majority of cases in which its implementation succeeded in larger production scales. Nevertheless, the modern masters themselves have proclaimed it as a hypothesis to take seriously, testing and using it throughout. It is also in this progressive motion beyond a comfort zone of what can be described as the architectural field of action, that we can find some of

20 the added value that prefabrication can bring to the architectural discursiveness—in the relations that can be established with the industry, with the language of the economy, or with certain sociocultural dynamics. On the other hand, prefabrication lacks an assertive definition, which introduces an added difficulty to the debate. However, it is also in this difficulty that a broader field of reflection can be found about architecture itself, inquiring about how it is fabricated, both materially (e.g., thinking in terms of modules or constructive components) as conceptually (e.g., thinking on knowledge modules or taxonomic concepts such as system or type). Finally, closing the cycle, prefabrication brings to the forefront the notion of product, architecture as commodity (or consumable), which brings us back to the idiosyncrasies of a globalized world, which can be expressed in dialectics such as local vs. global, control vs. alterity, or art vs. reproducibility, and observable in its natural, anthropological, linguistic (semiotic) or typological dimensions.

3 A methodologic potential and improvement of human habitat

Prefabrication has numerous faces. Thus, we must limit the object of study, which in this case primarily focuses on single-family housing. There are several justifications that can be appended to this restriction, but there are two that particularly deserve attention. Firstly, a focus on the problematic (human and architectural) of housing and dwelling. Secondly, the idea of prefabrication of houses as a product in architectural terms—industrialized, publicized, … consumed. It is thus about understanding architecture from a methodological point of view, in which the sphere of design and construction are regarded as collaborating parts, yet excisable in the whole. A perspective of modularity of an industrialist nature, which does not necessarily have to restring architectural creativity or formal or functional outputs—e.g. as is the case of mass customization. On the other hand, a perspective that in its opposite does not have to be captive of industrial practices—i.e. not alienating ancestral constructive practices. Finally, above all, that may frame a contribution to the improvement of the human habitat. Thus, this thesis is also a proposal to look at the practice of architectural design under a modular, discrete aegis, closely linked to an industrial language and with intentional reflexes in constructive efficiency, quality or economy—admittedly modern adages, nonetheless impossible to ignore in any period. Finally, if on the one hand, as a discipline of social and mediatic visibility, architecture is fed by formal feats and the like, on the other hand, it also evaluates these same formalities or stylizations in a binomial action-reaction between practice and criticism. In addition, although there are many architects, many with great quality (others not so much), and an extensive framework of regulations, with many mechanisms of possible scrutiny, recognition of lack of quality in the built environment

is [too much often] observable. Architects are, on the one hand, positioned in the legitimate and proper aspirations of their art and, on the other, tied to an immense complexity of social, environmental or economic constraints, where the levels of freedom of creative action are, for better or for worse, subjected to a sphere of control located upstream, where the architect has little or no direct intervention. Notwithstanding the cases in which the negative aspects end up coming from the very architects, the complexity of constraints has the pernicious effect of fading the relevance of the profession, while paradoxically the human habitat is deteriorated. At a global level, demographic or resource availability prospects do not draw optimistic scenarios for a general improvement of the built environment, although resource constraints may have the indirect positive effect of triggering more pragmatic responses. Unarguably, the problems are visibly out there—sometimes closer than what we may think, from [extreme] poverty to lack of access to water, sanitation or fuel, and so on—and a response in a business as usual mode will probably be insufficient. It is known that an unlimited belief in progress has limits, and that technological development alone will not suffice7. In a way, while the future was viewed with positivism in modernity, we now distrust that same future—and perhaps prefabrication makes as much sense as before, but for completely different reasons. On its own, architecture cannot solve society’s ills. Nevertheless, architects will probably have to get used to leave their comfort zones (perhaps more than ever before), adjusting practices to new realities and the reality of global resource constraints. In this perspective, the confrontation with some of the old demons of prefabrication has here an intention that is both scrutinizing and provocative. It also matters to show prefabrication as an option, not always regarded favorably by architects, which may carry other values that are not necessarily focused on the inevitable aesthetics in which much of the mainstream production and dissemination of architecture has largely been focusing. Whether cherished or not, these alternatives do exist, are part of the ecosystem of human constructions, and can contribute to the overall improvement of the built environment. In brief, it is useless to exclude them, but instead bring them a sense of normality in the praxis. Therefore, it also aims to be a contribution to the (re)centralization of focus of the disciplinary action of architecture in the improvement of the built environment quality, in the belief that it is through it that the profession will continue to make sense and to be relevant in the future. Prefabrication, or the idea of prefabrication, has long rendered visible another bias that persists among architects, which in many cases can be related to a certain ego of authorship. Moreover, more or less based fears that the prefabrication is hazardous to the built environment, by connotations such as low constructive or architectural quality, in fact are not that different from fears such as those that can be attributed to the speculative real-estate of great footage. Ultimately, that can be considered as

a matter of standpoint and perception, and perceptions may be deceiving. In the end, the great difference can at best lay in doing things well, instead of not so well, keeping professional and human integrity, and that certainly that does not depend on any constructive method or technology, prefabrication or any other.

4 Road Map

This thesis is distributed over a main volume and an annex volume, the latter complementing the subjects of the first. The main volume is organized in four parts, containing two main chapters, conclusions and an epilogue. The first part establishes a general background to the theme: starting by addressing the subject of industrialization and the housing problem in a modernist context; to subsequently formulate a review of a (post)modern period through structuralist building blocks; and finally expounding several taxonomical perspectives that establish a background of systematic approach possibilities towards architectural production. The central part, the second, is where the prefabrication theme is thoroughly expanded: from the establishment of a prefabrication vocabulary through a view on the historical evolution of constructive practices and a definition of terms; to the expounding of archetypal comparison paradigms of an industrial sphere with architectural production modes; the addressing of variability aspects; the clarification of a modularity lexicon; and finally culminating in an extensive description of the development of a modular prefabrication case-study. The third part extracts the main conclusions in respect to the central prefabrication theme, expounding them in the form of take home notes. Finally, the fourth part constitutes an epistemological epilogue, where we more freely express concerns related with the ways architecture is contemporarily and globally fabricated.

23 24

I A Mechanistic Inheritance

A task is thereby set for thought: that of contesting the origin of things, but of contesting it in order to give it a foundation, … that origin without origin or beginning, on the basis of which everything is able to come into being. —Michel Foucault8

Somos fragmentos e projectamos isso uns nos outros. [We are fragments and project it on each other. (Free translation)] —Ana Teresa Pereira9

Marco Polo describes a bridge, stone by stone. “But which is the stone that supports the bridge?” Kublai Khan asks. “The bridge is not supported by one stone or another”, Marco answers, “but by the line of the arch that they form”. Kublai Khan remains silent, reflecting. Then he adds: “Why do you speak to me of the stones? It is only the arch that matters to me”. Polo answers: “Without stones there is no arch”. —Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities10

26 1 INDUSTRIALIZATION AND THE HOUSING PROBLEM: ARCHITECTURE’S FOUNDATIONS THROUGH MODERNISM

1.1 Echoes of a Cartesian space and time

The space-time11 conceptions inherited from Enlightenment’s remarkable figures such as New- ton and Descartes were key to the formulation of a Modern world-view12, installing a mechanistic approach on phenomena, embedded by a positivist spirit founded in scientific objectivity, influencing a coming era and architecture throughout. That is noticed in aspects such as the typically cartographic modes of spatial representation—e.g. nautical charts or ruled architectural drawings—or in the conceptions and mechanisms developed to observe and optimize production purposes—e.g. those embedded by organization of Henry Ford’s assembly line—and so forth. René Descartes (b.1596-d.1650) understood space from the perspective of a geometrical extension, laid in the dualistic grounds of the res cogitans and res extensa, measurable, sub-dividable, neutral, and finally frameable by a set of coordinates13. The conception was enveloped by the method14, which persists to our days enrooted in the ontologies of knowledge, in the basis of the scientific quest. In physics, Isaac Newton (b.1643-d.1727) was the first to provide a comprehensive mathematical model of “space, time and motion”15 in his Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687). But it was not until Albert Einstein’s (b.1879-d.1955) Generalized Theory of Relativity (1916), that came a confirmation that space and time are inseparable, and a space-time causality with gravity was disclosed16. The theory can be regarded as the Rosetta stone of a series of philosophical implications, where all things have a relational consistency, from where analogies can be established with nature (e.g. through the notion of ecosystem), with a human sphere (e.g. through the notion of social network), and so on. In 1941, Sigfried Giedion (b.1888-d.1968) published the well-known Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition17. Giedion’s writings denote a certain operative, or even a dogmatic tone, which broadly lines up with the mainstream architectural discourse of those days, where it is fundamentally implied a Cartesian outset of methodic shades. Subsequent authors, such as Manfredo Tafuri (b.1935-d.1994) with his operative criticism18, have criticized the modernist tone and its strings of dog- matisms, without which architecture’s freedom could apparently be limitless and potentially richer. On the other hand, we must recall that architectural modernity has had its virtues, and that our multi- referential world also needs critical (thus implicitly partial) modes of describing history, as Giedion did, to establish and endorse those references which otherwise may fall under the radar. To recall certain aspects of some discourses, as that of space and time in architecture, is not a way to devaluate the importance of any sort of operative criticism. All the contrary, it can contribute to locate and understand our world through an architectural perspective, which too needs to nurture and refresh its

27 references outside a vociferous loop of trends and superficial imagery where it seems to recurrently fall: un-referential, purely relational, or instantaneous [complement with: Annex, I.2 The fragment experience of space-time]. Anyhow, in the architectural praxis, the modernist posture, as embodied in Giedion’s space and time exposure, is implicitly still largely in action, and its Cartesian outset still mostly inevitable. As in any other human activity, in architectural production everything ends up being related with some sort of organization and/or conformation of space-time related phenomena. Instead of plainly surrendering it to a sphere of Cartesian control, we can understand it more as expressing the potential for multiple directions, and hence multiple forms, as many examples subsequent to a modernist era have arguably attempted. For instance, that was the case with the principles implied in Jørn Utzon’s (b.1918-d.2008) additive architecture manifesto (1965)19 or, in a broader dimension, with the architectural structuralism rule-based design proposals20. Of the first we can find built manifestations such as the Kingo houses (1958), or the Espansiva System (1969), and of the latter works such as Aldo Van Eyck’s (b.1918-d.1999) Orphanage (1960), or Moshe Safdie’s (b.1938) Habitat’67 (1967) (Figure 1). These examples cross distinct architectural manifestations, different proposals by different architects with different interests and conceptions. Yet, in common they all contributed with an analysis and projection of specific space-time realities, namely by typifying elements that can be connoted with principles of economy—through production scales or repetition, or use of industrialized methods of construction, and so forth. This has occurred without relinquishing an idea of diversity, or even a certain organicity in the outputted forms. By doing so, they have also shown that the industrialized methods of construction that modernity brought about to the stand, did not have to be looked as restrictive, limited or downgraded approaches, as biased by some. Instead, they could be profoundly Modern, while disclosing something beyond. It is not our purpose to evaluate the impact of Giedion’s or any of his pairs’ ideas had in outcomes such as these. Yet, the latter would certainly not be conceivable without a modernist precedence. In- deed, we can observe modernism as the peak expression of a Cartesian conception in architecture, with its space and time references and the like. Similarly, we can affirm that its primary critics, and some of its inheritors, have explored under a relativist frame, more concerned with relational elements in a multi- referential, dynamic process of construction, where the space-time referrals are too not unique, and an Darwinistic evolutionary stance is also implied. In this sense, the latter is too a conception that has opened room for architecture to deal with other referrals which are not only those of the canonic physical space (Newtonian), but also the virtual, utopian or imaginary, as well as of networking conceptions or heterarchical distribution of constructive or spatial elements. Finally, it is a conception whose current

Figure 1. Utzon’s Kingo houses (a), Eyck’s Orphanage (b) and Safdie’s Habitat’67 (c).

global context enacts an ease of information availability like never, rendering architecture’s secrets more accessible, which leaves it more vulnerable, but also potentially more powerful. Since Einstein’s days, science has conceived multiple dimensions standing beyond the humanly intelligible 3+1 of a space-time continuum21. Nevertheless, the dimensions of analysis that commonly matter for architectural production have not fundamentally changed for centuries, mostly located within a space-time frame that is both Newtonian and intrinsically phenomenological22. Indeed, architectural production, as we have come to know it from history, typically deals with a tridimensional space, and at most with its conformation within a certain time frame23. Also, we must not forget the experiential dimension, subjectively occurring throughout building’s lifespan—as Stewart Brand 24 pointed out, buildings do not crystalize in one moment in time, but are ought to be lived and experienced (inhabited), having a life of their own. In western architectural culture, these spatial notions are traceable back to Vitruvius, which refers the horizontal ground plane of reference—smoothing and leveling the terrain, to create a stable ground where things can be swiftly be built upon—and the vertical reference—pictured by the man standing upwards, with the head facing the cosmos and the feet facing the earth25. From that notion, buildings are thus earthly erected facing gravity—the upright directional reference—the elements, its users, and these altogether in time. This already indicated not simply a 3+1D space, but a space-time which had at least another kind of experiential dimension provided by the user, that is, a relationally human space. Indeed, the architectural production, in its re-conformation of space-time ought to require an attitude that transcends a geometrical dimension, a strictly purposeful action or functionalist predic- tion26, since it implies interference in behavioral necessities. Ultimately, the latter are not aprioristically definable, even if statistically more or less expectable, since subjectable to volatile desires, aspirations, and the iterative path of relations with a changing surrounding world. Moreover, the human social being is a cultural being, with implications that have come a long way from the fundamental human act of appropriation of space, quintessentially illustrated by the mythic occurrence of the gathering by the fire27. To the Vitruvian vertical and horizontal dimensions, its references given by the ground and the upright figure with head facing the firmament and feet the earth, a social and cultural stance rhetorically introduced the public and private dimensions of man’s life. As a hub from where multiple switches emanate, the quintessential dwelling—ontological artifact for human inhabitation—was hence located between the public and the private spheres, as an essential element for human life, both as protective device and social core28. In this sense, the dwelling can be regarded as proto-city and its microcosms, both subject to the same principles. It is thus in the fiery warmth of this both mythical and familial gathering of Man in an atavic space-time, that arguably too architecture finds its birth- place29. It is too in the dwelling’s milieu that a new modernist architecture would initially focus.

30 1.2 The establishment of a modernist architecture through CIAM

Modernist architecture echoed a certain fascination on the industrial production. “A house is a machine for living in” are the famous Le Corbusier’s words in Vers une Architecture (1923)30. This new, modern, machine age, ruptured previous conceptions both artistically and intellectually. As it had happened in the arts, an interest grew in exploring beyond figurative or stylistic modes. Concordantly, as implied in the declaration of La Sarraz, for the early CIAM congressional representatives, modern architecture had to be viscerally created from the most basic relations. Furthermore, the new way had to be widely endorsed to the public31. On the one hand, a critique was made to the historical-based aesthetics, most notably to the neoclassical approaches, but also to the typical XIXth century eclecticisms and the like. On the other hand, in due time, it would also become clear that the fascination on the new, limitless possibilities would not reach full maturity. The considerations found a superlative metaphor in the machine, which could be connoted with causes (e.g. industrialization and consequent urban growth), effects (e.g. new social and working paradigms, different family structures, birthrates), or idealized aspirations (e.g. produce houses as if were machines)32. While a new idea of progress flourished, it grew a renovated interest in ancient and remote cul- tures33. Alongside, the natural and anthropological findings, added to the technical (e.g. photography) or the scientific (e.g. relational space-time in physics), contributed to the artistic boiling of the turn of the century. As arts were becoming more abstractly modern, with the constructivism or the gestalt, they were also becoming aware of earlier and remote cultures, of a nature leaving the enlightened preci- sions of the realism’s or naturalism’s, and acquiring different humanistic features, as reflected in the works of leading artists such as Gaugin, Picasso, Klee or Modigliani. Broadly, the influence of the rich intellectual and artistic developments of the turn of the XXth century in architecture can be put between a certain aesthetics of the machine (e.g. Futurism) and a certain aesthetics of nature (e.g. Impressionism) anchored in humanist convictions and a positivist spirit, producing a rich and varied legacy of outputs. Architecturally, it was neither a hollow aesthetics, as a subsequent critical accusation of a modernist tabula rasa could lead to presume. It was an aesthetics where the aspects of the human nature, as represented by vernacular traditions or by the needs portrayed by the urban hygienization, were firmly present. The CIAM, as its terminology denotes, would be set up to develop and promote the modernist ideas, with main discernable focuses in housing and urbanism34. Its first five meetings took place before WWII, and through the spoils of WWI and the Great Depression. Its foundation, with the declaration of La Sarraz (Switzerland, 1928)35, revealed the famous four-part division of functions subscribed in the early CIAM, while it rejected the formal archetypes that had been a trademark of the XIXth century architecture. That came in favor of a conceptual core laid in science—“house life is

about a regular series of precise functions”, as put by Le Corbusier in 1929 in the Frankfurt congress36. In its inceptions, the movement became the playground par excellence of notable members such as Giedion, Gropius or Le Corbusier, which took the forum’s opportunity to spread their doctrine. At times, the tone sounded more propagandistic or idealistic than substantiated in a methodology of some sort37. Nonetheless, the seriousness and relevance of the proposals is unquestionable and an analytic tone prevails, as recognizable by the ramifications that extended far beyond their historic conjuncture. The contributions are foundational in the least by means of their radical and valuable, interventive and provocative ideas, addressing the great architectural issues of their times, with a firm translation in the idea of a new, modern spirit—l'esprit nouveau. If the declaration of La Sarraz served as a model to embrace a modern discourse, an also relevant landmark followed in 1942. That was the year when, after a ship cruise session on the Mediterranean, Le Corbusier publishes the Chartre d’Athénes38, based on the Ville Radieuse book (1935), containing an account derived from the discussions taken from the first five meetings. The charter set a total of ninety-five points, numbered as if epistles, distributed in six topics: habitation, leisure, work, traffic, the historic heritage of cities, and conclusions – main points of the doctrine39. Unmistakably ascribing to a credibility that can typically be associated with a presumed scientific objectivity, it was expressed with a rationalistic, analytical tone. With it, buildings should have ideal solar orientation, ideal spacing, ideal location, provided by ideal green spaces, served by ideal transportation to minimize commute troubles, in streets with ideal width, and using ideal speeds—the perfect place for an ideal Man. Moreover, historically relevant buildings were to be kept only if considered of good value, and their conservation of no much trouble to the implementation of the modern predicates, and so forth40. However, the deterministic tone became unacceptable to the younger members who joined the congress after WWII. In fact, two phases can roughly be distinguished when considering the overall CIAM meetings41. A first phase arising from the housing problem of the industrial metropolis, embodying the functional city, building or greenery, under concepts such as Giedion’s space and time42. A second, attempting to establish different, more emotional links between social and built structures, which the first stage did not ignore but seemed to have been somewhat forgotten, with consequences in how urban planning and form were understood. The difference can probably be explained by the period of WWII that had intermediated the two stages, with traumatic implications also through some massive post-war reconstruction undertakings, and concomitantly because there was a new generation on the course of making its affirmation.

1.3 The housing problem in the modernist formulation

The origins of the foundational CIAM had many faces, namely social (e.g. housing for workers migrating from rural areas and overcrowding cities) and artistic (e.g. new conceptions of form). The most profound roots were related with the housing and concomitant urban issues, the difficult inheritances of the establishment of an industrial age, as of WWI, or as of the economic depression. Sanitizing cities which were of escalating size and complexity, providing proper conditions to its affluent workers, were among the key aspects commanding (and demanding) a new scientific approach to architecture in the first decades of the XXth century43. As it is well-known, the Industrial Revolution had established a new period in the development of human settlements. The dwelling, a shelter for individual and family use, and the urban setting as the dwelling’s background towards community life, would be deeply transformed by a set of significant technical and political innovations. Reforms initiate when the issues of urban and territorial organization emerging from the industrialization begun to be more clearly understood. It became obvious that the rules on which the pre-industrial city had been based would not fit the new developments. Thus, with the wild development of the industrial metropolis in the XIXth century, housing became a major social issue. Big territorial shifts occur, with a massive migratory flow from rural to urban areas, where people would come, e.g., in the search for work in the factories located in the city fringes. Alongside, there was population boom in the second half of XIXth century in most countries where industrialization took a stronger pace. As result, there was a widespread housing deficit, with many people accommodated in cities whose pace of growth could not keep up with the demand. Likewise, for the first time in history, home and workplace division occurs on a mass scale. The workforce became detached from the workplace, and a new set of issues aroused from the conflicts between people and transportation. The rise of the big industries and of new modes of transportation, such as the car or the train, contributed to urgent house demands, which ultimately led to a change in planning philosophies. The railway sliced the city, non-residential business centers sprang up, market mechanisms contributed to break cities into differentiated zones, and so forth. Constrained to the valuation of land price, the residential, commercial or industrial areas naturally ended up getting economically [and thus socially] segregated. The dramatic growth of urban population was confronted with the lack of proper water, sanitation or energy sources for heating or cooking. The insufficiencies were confirmed by epidemic surges of cholera, typhoid or tuberculosis, particularly before the occurrence of some important advances in medical sciences during the second half of the XIXth century. The first international economic crisis, a period of a relative economic stall between the 1870s and the end of the XIXth century known as the Long Depression, did not contribute to any improvement. Starveling rural workers escaped in

33 even higher numbers to already crowded cities and, consequently, conditions were further deteriorated. Adequately providing proper housing conditions in the cities thus became a central matter from the second half of the XIXth century onwards. In the early XXth century, the WWI (1914-1918) and, successively, the effects of the Great Depression in the 1930s, would further stress the house problem. The case of Berlin during the Weimar Republic (1919-1933) is remarkably illustrative of the issues in the industrialized metropolis in the beginnings of the XXth century44. The sort of reported problems, although intrinsically dated in their specificities, can certainly be regarded as universal in their type, as observable by their historical recurrence, and their sound similarity to the growing pains of the developing countries in our days. Dwelling and city, house and urban policy, became interdependent with industrialization. Initially, the poor housing conditions were the purview of engineers and city planners involved in the water supply and sewer management. With the shift of production and social structures, cities become territory for experimentation and urban and house research. There are several examples, more or less conceptual, more or less utopian, or more or less implemented. Some addressed urbanism through innovative dwelling concepts, with examples that can be regarded as groundbreaking or even utopian for their epoch. Nonetheless, some cases would become true prototypes of modern housing. In this sense, the New Harmony of Robert Owen (b.1771-d.1858), the Phalanstère of Charles Fourier (b.1772- d.1837), the Victoria of James Silk Buckingham (b.1786-d.1855), or the Familistère de Guise of Jean- Baptiste André Godin (b.1817-d.1889) are some of the most representative. Other examples, each at their scale and purposes, denoted even more ambitious programmatic intentions for the city. Pro- posals thoroughly describing the sort of actions to undertake, from the block and street to the dwelling level, where examples such as the Barcelona Eixample of Ildefons Cerdà (b.1815-d.1876), the Linear City of Arturo Soria y Mata (b.1844d.1920), the Industrial City of Tony Garnier (b.1969-d.1948), or the Athens Charter of CIAM are unavoidable references. These had the merit of surpassing the classical urbanism and, additionally, to be both true theoretical and practical essays of the modern urbanism45. In all cases, of all the undertakings, the gravitational sphere of CIAM would echo more intensely than any other. With exceptions, such as those we have referred, architects would only begin to develop a widespread interest in the house problem of the working-class in the beginnings of the XXth century. Examples of this period can be found, e.g., in speculative communal blocks of Karl Marx Hof in Vienna46, or of Gropius, Haesler, Fisher and others for the Dammerstock neighborhood in Berlin47. The problem moved to the top of political agenda in the end of the 1910s. For instance, in Moscow, in 1919, the state promoted a competition for a model neighborhood of what would be a new city48. In the end of the 1920s, architects joined forces through CIAM. Rotterdam, Frankfurt, Warsaw, Paris, Prague, Amsterdam, Madrid, Budapest, Brussels, Vienna, Berlin, or Moscow, from these and

other places, projects were scrutinized by leading architectural professionals. From these, studies and designs would be produced, and buildings constructed, through new, modern and functional principles. The content was to master the form. Adhesion to a revolutionary ideal and a renewed social and political commitment was accompanied by the conviction that all this should correspond to radically new artistic forms, freed of any bond to past traditions. On the other hand, the ideals of the architects and artists were also based on naive and romantic (or delusional) assumptions, as expressed on the utopia that architecture is able to solve society’s ills—“On the day when contemporary society, at present so sick, has become properly aware that only architecture and city planning can provide the exact prescription for its ills, then the time will have come for the great machine to be put in motion and begin its functions”, writes Le Corbusier49. A New Objectivity renounced the cosmic pathos and the abstract outburst of expressionisms. In Gro- pius’ words, buildings were to be made of “precisely defined forms, simplicity in multiplicity, repartition according to function and restriction to typical basic forms. It should also be sequential and repetitive”. These would be “shaped by internal laws without lies and games; all that is unnecessary, that veils the absolute design, must be shed”50. The new spirit of building, based on technological achievements was about to conquer the civilized world and building as the way to shape life’s processes. Architecture’s formal outputs denote artistic references spanning from the Constructivist approach of El Lissitzky, to the De Stijl of Theo van Doesburg, or, the Gestalt in the Bauhaus. In the 1920s, the Modern spirit of CIAM, embedded in an implied Taylorist philosophy of scientific management, would look for objective ways to optimize floor plans, minimize areas to the least conceivable relatively to their assigned functions. In a way, form could no longer be distinguished from function, and so the academic compositional principle, typical of the XIXth century no longer made much sense. The catchphrase of the American architect Louis Sullivan, “form follows function”, would long stand as a popular mantra.

1.4 Convolutions of a modernist science

The demand of a standard dimensional reduction of the social housing production—required by both the general situation of scarcity, derived from the Great Depression, as for the actual decline in the household characteristics—coincides with the process of rationalization of the distribution of elements in a plan, consistent with the investigations to optimize housing via rationalistic methodologies. A whole series of proposals of plans distributions and sizes, including those presented in the Existenzminimum exhibition in Frankfurt, of the 1929 CIAM, would be proposed with a priority objective of minimization. Generally, the exhibited proposals renounced a review of the internal housing structure, attested the lack of a critical insight regarding the existing conditions, and were limited to a sectorial rationalization of the typologies. Related research flourishes throughout this period, addressing housing types and their aggrega- tions, the development of building and urban standards, or issues related with solar orientation and ventilation. In addition, there are developments in the field of prefabrication and modular or dimensional coordination, of which Le Corbusier’s Modulor stood as one of the most famous examples. It is also of relevance the development of the concept of standard, understood by the rationalists as guarantee of a minimum, not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively, in the production of modular elements applied to the social house51. The high quality of some of the outputs is an impartial testi- mony. Broadly, it is emphasized the need to devise methodologies that could clarify the project, that is, clarify the architectural job from the adoption of practices that should not be based only in subjective intuition, but in scientific observation that might be transmitted and controlled. Research would have a large production in the study of ergonomics, in circulation optimization or in production rationalization. Some developments transported efficient production techniques to the building design. Floor areas for a certain activity, the description of each single function (eating, sleeping, cooking, and so on), how that could spatially relate to others, and so forth, soon made sense conceiving them through quantitative prescription. While some researchers, through ergonomics, mapped the human body to find out the healthiest and least tiring postures in the different activities, other have tried to map the activities that take place day in day out in a house. A well-known example, by Alexander Klein, was a series of diagrams of how a house is used day and night. By establishing when and how a certain action takes place, it would be possible to infer the minimum space it required. By grouping functional units (e.g. bedrooms, living and dining rooms, kitchen or bathrooms) precisely according to the optimum, a sense of objectivity would be retained (assuming the space would be used as originally designed, i.e., with little or no change over time). In 1936, Ernst Neufert coordinated the publication of a comprehensive volume entitled Bauentwurfslehre, depicting information on the measurements necessary for any imaginable activity—from the dimensioning and spacing of chairs in an auditorium, to road traffic and park dimensioning—becoming a reference for

generations to come. Le Corbusier’s Modulor, first published in 1948, and with an addition, the Modulor 2 (1955), became a reference as a dimensional regulating system, an attempt to universalize dimensions and proportions through a progressive scale, based on the Fibonacci sequence and the related golden ratio φ. Housing thus becomes an architectural research laboratory par excellence. The minimum dwelling problem, says Gropius in the CIAM of Frankfurt, “is to establish an elementary minimum of space, air, light and heat essential to humans to fully develop their vital functions without restrictions due to housing, or at least establish a modus vivendi rather than a modus non moriendi”52. It is a modus vivendi in which, in the least, every adult should be provided by a practical minimum invaded by light and sun53. However, to a rational pursuit of an Existenzminimum—the biological minimum of air, light and space essential for life—Alexander Klein and others add psychological objectives54, a notion reinforced through the Chartre d’Athènes55. To the house it was attributed the function of refuge against the contradictions and conflicts of the city, i.e., the privileged place for privacy, rest and strength recovery of the workers’ force. As in Vi- truvius’, the house was again revisited as cell and proto-cell of the city—from the mirror of its intimacy, (urban) man becomes a social being, finding its place culturally in the world. As put by Giedion, the simple housing cell leads to the organization of the construction methods, and these lead to the organization of the entire city: the house is the molecule of the urban organism56. With tools such as the Modulor, it was finally possible to link it scientifically all together. Overshadowed by more famous figures, such as Gropius, Taut, Giedion or Le Corbusier, the works of Alexander Klein or of Karel Teige figure among the strongest advocates of a scientific spirit. Klein had a remarkably innovative and mathematically rigorous methodology, comparing various types of dwellings, aiming to determine objective terms for the valuation of the design quality57. Teige accounted the Frankfurt’s derived Existenzminimum exhibit, revealing a scientific, functionalist approach grounded in Marxist principles58. In 1929 Teige would notoriously criticize Le Corbusier’s never built Mundaneum project, affirming that the rational functionalism from where Le Corbusier would have had departed was being lost, on a way to become a caricature, a mere stylistic mode. Teige’s belief on rational methodologies can be summed up in the words: “the only aim and scope of modern architecture is the scientific solution of exact tasks of rational construction”59 [complement with: Annex, I.3 Illustrating ideological incongruities]. Anyhow, it is notorious that much of the early agenda of CIAM deals with critical housing and urban issues60. With nuances, the theme would be continually revisited until the latter stages of CIAM’s meetings. Indeed, from the foundation (1928, La Sarraz, Switzerland), until the dissolution (1959, Otterlo, The Netherlands), the grand themes in discussion consistently verse housing and its entourage, from the most atomic level of analysis (e.g. the dwelling cell), to a larger territorial level (e.g. the urban planning). La Sarraz’s programmatic setup had been clear through its four main

points—“General Economic System”, “Town Planning”, “Architecture and Public Opinion”, and “Architecture and Its Relations with the State”61—where the underlying idea was to create an agenda to implement a new architecture in a new world. That agenda is pinpointed by a general idea of rejection of a certain bourgeoisie establishment of the very architectural profession. Despite the quarrels, as those portrayed by Teige’s critic to Le Corbusier’s Mundaneum never-built project, intuition and art of building were to be commanded by science, configuring a true flagship of a Cartesian positivism. With no less relevance, these also embodied an ideological program, as well as a propagandistic plea, setting the tone for the subsequent Chartre d’Athènes. Implicitly denoting a Marxist philosophy, and a Socialist affiliation, in the first point of the founding La Sarraz’s declaration, architecture was regarded in terms of a transversal idea of economy. The purpose was to achieve economic efficiency to deal with the impoverishment problems largely affecting society. Towards this goal, make use of rationalization and standardization methods both in architectural conception, as in the building industry realization. This meant making both architecture and industry to evolve single-handed, through working methods simplification both in factory and in-situ, through reduction of unskilled labor and increasing skilled technicians, and finally through a re-education of consumers. The latter would be prompted to have less individual demands for the sake of a greater common good, which was housing to be available for the maximum number of people. Machine production was placed in the opposite pole of craftsmanship, a statement which referred both to a seemingly inertia of traditional academia to adopt new methods and forms, and a hint to embrace the vocabulary of industry and its methods, whether in processes, forms or even philosophy of design and building production. In the second point, planning was regarded as an essential way towards an overall organization of life in all regions, both in urban and rural areas, through means of a functional order and not by aesthetically derived pre-conceptions. The famous four-part functionalist division—i.e. dwelling, work, transportation and recreation—is therein drafted through dwelling, working and relaxing, and focusing action on the division of the soil, organization of traffic and legislation. A key point was to follow a rigorous causality between statistical data derived from the economic and social environment (e.g. demographics) and spatial occupancy and distribution of inhabited areas, green areas and traffic. These were to be constantly monitored for updated status, so that legislation and an ever- evolving technical sphere would be kept in close pace. In the third point, a call was made for architects to spread these ideas on public opinion, referring the misconceptions to which architecture was often taken for—e.g. aesthetical preconceptions or expensive connotations—and which had diverted it from what should be its main concern: properly articulating the house problem. Set in a long term, the goal was to, through schools and academia, educate people—clients, architects, builders, and so forth—for them to embrace new ideas and leave behind the old connotations. Finally, on the last point, it was reinforced a statement on the obsolete and inertial academia establishment, and its role

and influence in the State decision-making over planning and architectural works. References span through works revealing inefficiency, economically disastrous, monumental, or aesthetically or formally outdated, nonsensical to the spirit of the times. These would occur at the expense of the urgent tasks of housing and planning; at the expense of the ultimate reason for all the concerns, which was the very idea of progress, of future, of new: of modern. Our zeitgeist is certainly different, and the modern(ist) architectural history had much more to it besides CIAM. However, despite the efforts, and with due differences, generally the preconceived opinions manifested in the public opinion as expressed in La Sarraz’s, as well as many of the sort of problems criticized, are still observable to these days. This can mean many things. For instance, that the noble intention to educate has failed, which in the least reflects a change of entourage, or even that the way the problematic was laid was doomed to be dated. It can also mean that the sort of vices whereby the profession was implicitly criticized by the public persist, and which can be summed up in a tendency for privileging certain formalistic or stylistic approaches. In that respect, Teige’s critique to Mundaneum should remain valid, not necessarily just in what refers to a reasoning for a scientific approach, but especially in what refers to what can be called of truthfulness of form, which subsequent authors such as Giorgio Grassi have so vividly addressed62. In the least, it should echo towards irrefutable ethical stances. Possibly this clash will never change, as architecture will always be about formalizing artifacts, hence necessarily overlooking a part of the available reality in favor of other, in part science, in part free, individual, artistic expression. Furthermore, implicitly, artifacts are not consensual, except in an ideal—unreal, utopian and dictatorial—isotropy. Past records are representations subjectable to dis- tortion, but still is all there is as ultimate validation tool. Yet, the radicalism of a seemingly tabula rasa—as historically but not entirely accurately, to some extent, the Modern Movement may be suspect of—can sometimes enable a fresher insight, as it did with the clash embodied by the early CIAM and the previous academia establishment. However, as relativism epistemologically implies, there is no absolute referential, thus no definite grand answers, and no solutions the solution. In the reality looked from human eyes, there is no single universalism, just attempts, questionings, an endless path of investigation for the Homo Significans. In time, CIAM would be questioned and later more clashes would arise. Nevertheless, the burst of CIAM certainly took architecture to a different place and we could not conceive it today without its shockwaves.

1.5 CIAM dismissal towards a new modernity

A younger generation of architects begun emerging in the post-WWII CIAM meetings63, revealing a gradually sharper critique of what had become a certain modern orthodoxy, which had, in their views, turned the early modern ideals in a sort of stylistic, technocratic, and socially unresponsive approach64. Broadly, the final period of CIAM is pinpointed by a determination to overcome a certain Cartesian fundamentalism of the early stages. Postwar reconstruction was a primary igniter of this purpose. Whole cities had to be rebuilt in a short period, with priorities in many cases given to provide housing in large scale, and with the Chartre d’Athènes widely adopted as methodological guidance. Prominent examples can for instance be found in The Netherlands, as is the case of the reconstruction efforts undertaken in the city of Rotterdam65. In some cases, such as in the social suspicion laid over UK’s postwar temporary housing program, reconstruction urgency led to a perception of a qualitative decline and a consequent criticism66. In the first post-WWII congress, the CIAM 6 (1947) entitled Reconstruction of the Cities, though with a quite explicit general theme in terms of tackling postwar reconstruction, the spirit was set to address the emotional and not only the material needs67. However, if different concerns were being expressed, the functional schemata seemed to be kept. Elder CIAM leaders kept bounded to earlier conceptions and such did not please a new generation of participants. From that point ahead two sides began diverging. The younger generation of architects participating in CIAM 6 brought fresh ideas and the debates with the elder anticipated the challenges to come. Although a seven-point resolution would be issued at the end of CIAM 7 (1949) some older delegates charged that CIAM was “losing its working character”68. Among other advances, the theme of the emotional needs would be further developed by the MARS group (Modern Architectural Research Group), the British-CIAM think tank formed in 1933. As preparation to CIAM 8 (1951), the MARS group prepared the topic entitled The Core, a title suggestive of a concern in re-centering the focus of urban discussion in issues of identity and community. With CIAM 9 (1953) came a decisive division between the old guard69 and a younger generation70, with the new proponents challenging the functionalist schemata of the Chartre d’Athènes. The dissatisfaction was reflected in a critical reaction to CIAM 8, with a famous sentence by the Smithson’s synthetizing the concerns: “Man may readily identify himself with his own hearth, but not easily with the town within which it is placed. ‘Belonging’ is a basic emotional need—its associations are of the simplest order. From ‘belonging’—identity—comes the enriched sense of neighbourliness. The short narrow street of the slum succeeds where spacious redevelopment frequently fails”71. Instead of a set of abstractions, they sought for structural principles of urban growth founded on the basic unit of the family cell, re-asserting the significance of the social, as well as of the symbolic features of the built environment. The position also stressed the significance of the values embodied by the vernacular building forms.

40 The dissatisfaction with the orthodoxy of early CIAM prompted national discussion groups and more or less informal international meetings to gather in between the congresses. The drive was to propose a different course for CIAM. The first meeting of what would later turn out to be Team 10 (aka Team X) was held at Doorn, The Netherlands, in January 1954, under the direction of Jaap Bakema. The agenda was to make the preliminary arrangements for the next congress, CIAM 10 (1956) in order to revise the Chartre d’Athènes into the Chartre d’Habitat. The new generation meeting at Doorn was united by the plea to make towns in which vital human associations would be expressed. Despite some divergences, the debates resulted in the Statement on Habitat, a document that was to be the first step towards the Chartre d’Habitat. Georges Candilis, one of the active members of Team 10, asserted that the senior members preconized the creation of a Chartre d’Habitat in the same fashion as the earlier Chartre d’Athènes. Such would be regarded by the elders as a great success whereas to them, the critics, “it seemed totally bogus”72. In the end, the pretense new Chartre d’Habitat would never came to life. The Statement on Habitat viewed the Chartre d’Athènes as an adequate way to address the problems of the XIXth century city, but inadequate to the XXth century reality, which fundamentally carried new social concerns73. It envisioned a planning philosophy in which the whole of a community and its specific characteristics would be considered. The concept would be synthesized in the Scale of Association diagram74, which was presented in Aix-en-Provence by the Smithsons75. The diagram proposed a replacement of the functional hierarchy of dwelling, work, transportation, and recreation emanated from the Chartre d’Athènes, with scaled unities of house, street, district and city. This was in line with MARS’s earlier proposals for the CIAM 7, which had recommended the inclusion of the category of scaled settlements from village to metropolis76. Through it, the dwelling was understood as the core of the community, and not the representational city center with its public notorious buildings. Archi- tecture was to be made inside-out, returning to its meaning inducting origins, i.e. in man and its habitat. In this perspective, a primary, higher hierarchy structure (e.g. infrastructure) acquired a preeminent role as facilitator of a community, key to give coherence while inducing freedom to the remaining urban thing. Overall, the Statement on Habitat was to replace CIAM’s functionalist methodology to analyze and compare settlements in different places, as the “story of the four functions was far too simple”77. Besides Team 10, several other discussion groups had been formed throughout the years. That was the case of the already referred MARS Group, in the 1930s, or the British artistic avant-garde IG (Independent Group), in the 1950s, as well as more or less formal, CIAM national discussion groups— e.g. the French ASCORAL or Paris-Jeune, the Dutch Opbouw, the Norwegian Pagon-Norway. Notwith- standing, from the fertile ground of the criticizing youth sphere of CIAM, no group or movement

would get a wider visibility than Team 1078. Some influent older CIAM members, namely Le Corbu- sier, would recognize the value of the young’s proposals. It was time to “turn the page”79, he affirmed, supporting the new proponents80. Indeed, the CIAM 11 (1959), in Otterlo, would mark the dissolution of the congress by Team 1081. Several attempts were subsequently conducted to re-ignite CIAM, such as the ICAT (International Congress for Architecture and Town-Planning), promoted by Jos Weber and other European architects, which would meet in Otterlo (1982), Hamburg (1983) and Copenhagen (1984)82. Nevertheless, the CIAM formula was inevitably wasted. In the final CIAM 11, Aldo Van Eyck83, called for a new awareness based on the core elements of human existence expressed in his Otterlo Circles84. The circles can be seen as a synthesis of CIAM’s dismissal and turning point towards a different, refreshed modernity85. Anyhow, Van Eyck’s proposal is not in rupture, yet fundamentally subscribes a reconciliatory thought. What is foremost valued is the establishment of relationships, to integrate, rather than keeping apart, and by that enriching the whole that is produced. A dialectic of complementaries’—what Van Eyck called dual phenomena— arises from this thought, where past and present, classic and modern, archaic and avant-garde, constancy and change, simplicity and complexity, organic and geometric can have a seamless coexistence. It is architecture opening itself to a relational sphere, to the “shape of relativity”86 [complement with: Annex, I.4 Aldo Van Eyck’s Orphanage synthesis]. Van Eyck, as other Team 10 participants, sought after architecture as an expression of the community. They aimed to dispense the rigor of determinist, functionalist thinking, dismissing the creation of symbols of community, as it had been implied by some of the monumental works in direct lineage with the Chartre d’Athénes. The 1950s planning and building of Chandigarh, master-planned by Le Corbusier, and particularly Brazilia, by Lúcio Costa and Oscar Niemeyer, would stand as superlative examples of such criticized monumentality, with their deterministic structures, their formally sublime, yet somewhat alienating abstraction. If for the most orthodox CIAM modernists architecture could be regarded as a sort of mediated representation, for the Team 10 participants there should be more a sort of primal language, where meaning and form are interconnected. Ground was thereby open to understand architecture from a new relational way, which was both relativist and structuralist. The aesthetical austerity, a certain monotonic rigidity of the initial modernism, was being replaced by an aesthetics of a new complexity based in a relationally dynamic understanding of structures. The emphasis on how space-time could be embodied was too set in opposition to a prevailing modernist conception of space in architecture, iconically formulated through Giedion’s space and time, where the essence of modernist architecture is regarded as the blend of space and time through the experience of movement. Architecture, “the masterly, correct and magnificent play of masses brought together in light”, as had been formulated by Le Corbusier in Towards a New Architecture in 1923, emphasized such

42 idealization of space87. Aldo Van Eyck’s concerns would depart from a different standpoint, expressed in his famous words: “Whatever space and time mean, place and occasion mean more. For space in the image of man is place, and time in the image of man is occasion”88. The arising question was not how to emulate movement and produce forms out of space-time, but how could people create a sense of place, that is, how could people create their own subjective spaces, or how could relativity find its intentionality in shape. In short, the grand issue was how to humanize the machine of mass rationalization. These were pivotal times where, in brief, the structural synchrony of the modern transitioned to a historically informed, post-modern diachrony. It is a fertile period, where there were different approaches arising, with distinct conceptual basis and different formal outputs. Anyhow, in common there seems to be an overall return to history and, fundamentally, there seems to be a new critical attitude installed. In brief, the modernist research path seemed to be exhausted, or in the least, the plea for newer and fresher references far exceeded what had earlier been the modernist appeal through its foundational CIAM. In between the rhetoric of theorists linked with what can be regarded as postmodernism, and what were the theoretical approaches of groups such as the Team 10 or the Metabolists, there seems to be an agreement that it was time to build a different, denser modern. As Charles Jenks explained in The Language of Post-Modern Architecture (1977), at least rhetorically, postmodernism succeeded in reviving the narrative potential, and thus a certain historicity of architecture89. The rejection of a modernist moral language and cherishment of an ambivalent, richer and wider pool is explicit in theoretical works such as the referential Robert Venturi’s Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (1966)90. However, the greatest criticism towards labels such as postmodernism could be placed in an often too literal interpretation of history in the formal outputs, overstating rhetoric. Notwithstanding, the postmodernism has had an appealing rhetoric of complexity and contradiction, as highlighted by a Las Vegas strip, with its pop imagery or advertisement-like shapes91. In a culture of consumption and a secularized society, the great architectural symbols in history, the temples or pyramids, were paralleled to the worship of ordinary forms of product, brand or fashion; with money, as the uttermost symbol making the world go round, in the roots of the genetic tree of human artifacts. The semiotic implications are unequivocal. Architecture, historically connoted as a symbol of power allied to capital, as Tafuri vividly expressed92, leaves the sacred plinth towards the profane ordinary. To the death of the author, expressed by the postructuralists in literature, is proclaimed the death of the architect, as he is a reader in himself, interpreter of everyday signals. I am a monument is thus a suggestive motto, paralleling the ordinary with the sophisticated, and from where forms of capital are so utterly obvious that are no longer concealable behind ideological or power representations.

However, the rhetoric of a re-symbolization of space also derived towards a sort of an iconographic revival of historical forms, where the subtleness and intricacy appraised in the discourse gave place to what can be regarded as literal, even caricatural formal acts appraising history. Indeed, if a duck shape may announce a content in the Las Vegas strip, on the other hand a classical, academically informed precision is used in compositional underlays, particularly visible in reinterpretations of columns, entablatures, pediments, and the like. In other developments, as in what can be acknowledged as a structuralist approach, there are also proofs of a return, or attempt of reconciliation of modernity with history. Such is flagged, for instance, in Aldo Van Eyck’s Otterlo Circles and is utterly visible in what can be described as a broad- range search for a re-foundation of principles through e.g. anthropology, the study of the historical vernacular built environment, or a refreshed look onto natural forms. In any case, it is clear, or so has stood in a seemingly tabula rasa myth, that in a way history (or depth of significance) had been neglected with modernism. It is a period when architecture seems to be freed, opening to the entire universe of possibilities, instead of being restringing itself to any sort of canon. Such appears to be an essential point of departure of any movement recognizable as such that have counterpointed modernism. From then on, architecture not only recovers a broad sense of history, as it proceeds with a different reengagement with nature or the archaic and/or ordinary vernacular, while also takes the first numerical steps towards a digital sphere. The moderns such as Gropius had sought for the “internal laws without lies and games”93. Yet, somewhat in the process, a bound with a non-idealized, with the (imperfect) real, had been lost. In some cases, depth of significance was even purposefully (operatively) discarded. The fact that the Bauhaus school had no history discipline upholds the statement; a fact, as presented by Gropius in the Bauhaus Manifesto and Program (1919), was due both to a visceral reaction to the old school, as of and understanding that arts and architecture should return to a profound knowledge of the crafts94. Approaches such as structuralism also went deeper in search of inner relations, but without losing sight of the con- notative bounds with the surface. They went deeper without losing sight with the levels of significance without which the structure loses its bounds with any possibility of humanism, as in a pure self- reflexivity of craft; the significance without which the structure has no density, no body, no touch, mere thin air, pure abstract representation.

2 ENGAGED STRUCTURES IN A (POST)MODERN WORLD: CONCEPTS, TRENDS, FORMS AND ALTERITIES

2.1 Structuralism, semiotics and significance

What we can call structuralism can broadly be described as a philosophy, or an overall worldview that provides an organic instead of an atomistic account of reality95. It can be regarded as a reference word for a mode of thought, of viewing things, a method to investigate and approach in a particular way96. Thus, it can be described as about inspecting systems’ relations through their elemental structures. Historically, it arises mostly in the XXth century, with notoriety from the second half onwards, manifested in multiple areas, although with emphasis on the social sciences and humanities—ranging from Linguistics, Logics, Semiotics, or Anthropology, and eventually reaching Architecture. It consensually develops from linguistics, particularly from Ferdinand de Saussure’s (b.1857-d.1913) referential work97 prior to WWI98. However, it would only be right after WWII, that the pioneering works of Claude Lévi-Strauss (b. 1908-d.2009), using it as model for his anthropological observations, reig- nited the interest in the approach, and decisively took it outside the field of linguistics. It is arguably from there that it acquires a wider recognition99, namely the acquaintance of an architectural audience avid of new references. By understanding that a structural analysis of linguistics could be methodologically derived to language, and thereby to the general analysis of phenomena, Saussure anticipated the discipline of semiology. His American contemporary, Charles S. Pierce, devised an analogous label, naming it semiotic. Lévi-Strauss’ contribution in anthropology, or Barthes’ work as critic and social theorist, namely in his Elements of Semiology100 (1964), updating many of Saussure’s basic principles, were key to decisively take the analysis outside the scope of linguistics. From there the notion evolved onto a wider conception of language as sign system, providing a common vocabulary to investigate conventions and codes of all types, from the lexicon of fashion, food, or art, to the rules of folk narrative, architectural or even medical codes, through literature, the world of images or the signals of the body, and so forth. As the structural approach pervaded the analysis of sign systems, a critical, poststructuralist reaction arose, fundamentally criticizing an apparent universalism or determinism of the first.

2.1.1 LANGUAGE AND SEMIOTICS Language is a condition for social or thinking processes101, to understand who and what we are, intervening between us, human beings, and the world, thus a determining element, even for the very

45 survival. It is what enables dialogue, communication, but that is only possible if we previously subscribe the meanings that precede our own familiarity with it—i.e. if we previously acknowledge the images and/or symbols it entails. The way things are classified through language interfere on our perspective on them102, yet most of the times we do not have such consciousness, even if we may be rationally aware of it—in the limit, language is invisible to us, transparently pervasive103. Finally, the notion of language can be expanded to include all signifying systems which enable access to information, whatever kind that is, thus implying a semiotic. Ferdinand de Saussure was the precursor of this understanding. Among his contributions, it is worth acknowledging with greater detail four related key notions: the distinction between synchronic and diachronic observation of language; the notion of meaning through difference; the distinction between language (lange) and speech (parole); and finally, the arguably more relevant notion of language as a sign system. Saussure was predominantly interested in a synchronic approach to linguistics, rather than in a diachronic approach104. The latter, classically followed by his predecessors, entails a historical or evolutionary kind of examination following from etymologies, phonetic change, and the like. Conversely, the synchronic approach entails a conception in which language is, so to say, frozen at a certain point in evolution to understand its functional principles. Surely that any pretension to make a comprehensive study of language must cover and combine both diachronic and synchronic angles. Saussure did it himself, and defended the usefulness and complementariness of both. Similarly, in a structuralist approach is not refused one over the other105. It is nonetheless unquestionable that the synchronic perspective revolutionarily opened a new territory for exploration, with repercussions far exceeding linguistics. Perhaps one of its most relevant impact aspects is that, departing from a social and cultural perspective, it founded a structural way of looking to phenomena. That means that social-related occurrences could thereon also be regarded with a scientific, systematic, or structural spirit, and with it contributing to strengthen some typically loose bounds with the natural-derived sciences. With it, order, method, structure, construction, and so forth, are strengthened as object of philosophy. Con- versely, humanities acquire a status similar to the so-called exact sciences, where a synchronic perspective can be paralleled with the search of universal laws—e.g. as in physics. The notion is in structuralism’s backbone, in the intention of approaching reality, its phenomena and construction, under a methodological thinking in which there is a guiding principle, or structure. In that sense, Lévi-Strauss’ work stood out, as he used the structures borrowed from linguistics in his anthropological works, thereby leaving the door wide open for others to use analogous methods in their respective fields of research. By getting closer to the anthropological structural relations, his work opened way to understand the world through a return to a beginning, to an aspired ontology.

This conviction in a return to the basics as a source for understanding society was undoubtedly strengthened by the adaptation of the new linguistic model106. Saussure formulated that words do not name things, but ideas, or, in other terms, “language is a form and not a substance”, adding: “this truth could not be overstressed, for all the mistakes in our terminology, all our incorrect ways of naming things that pertain to language, stem from the involuntary supposition that the linguistic phenomenon must have substance”107. In this sense, what defines an idea is its relation to the other words in the system, and that leads to the concept of difference in language. Each sign has a meaning, because it is different from other signs within the same language, rather than because of any linguistic reason to be so. Thereby, the relation between these is expressed as a difference in negative terms, as when saying e.g. ocean and fish are different. Language can thus be understood as constructed of differences without positive terms. Nevertheless, these are positive when considered in their totality—e.g. to reach a definition of intense, we can say not weak, expressing the meaning by the negative term of another. As more negative interpolations of this kind are found, the clearer a word is rendered to us, with the resulting meaning thus produced being positive. In brief, without difference, meaning is an impossibility—“in language there are only differences”108. Mean- ing is not mysteriously immanent in a word or sign, but it is functional, the result of its difference from other signs. Moreover, a one-term language would be an impossibility, since difference requires at least two terms. Thereby, it is reasonable to consider possible, even if rudimentary, to describe an entire universe from a two-term, or binary language, as Saussure himself implied109. Such a binary notion entails an evolutionary perspective, one that is organic since it is made of unfolding constructions of meaning, but also one that can ultimately be machined—and it is worth noting that this occurs decades before Alan Turing’s formulation of the backbone of today’s computing. Thoughts and sounds, images and symbols, work together through speech (parole), which is framed by language (langue), thus enabling ideas to be expressed, and so forth. All of this moves back and forth. Language denotes a shared system with its own rules, that is, the language as a whole (e.g. Portuguese, English, and so on). Speech denotes a particular use of units of language, or what individuals use, from the resources of language in their day-to-day use—speaking, writing, or uttering110. In this sense, the language is the entire system, the frame, the reference. Conversely, the speech is its atomic constituents, which are subjected to language, but poised to transform it in time, as it is empowered with the recombination of existing forms in new ways. A language is not complete in any speaker. Its perfection lies solely in a collective, and therefore it implies a social sphere—i.e. at least two or more subjects. It is not purely personal nor private since such does not allow dialogue, hence hardly qualifiable as language at all. As Saussure expressed: “Lan- guage furnishes the best proof that a law accepted by a community is a thing that is tolerated and not a rule to which all freely consent”. When, in the inceptions of the biological sciences, naturalists classified animals or

plants, labelling them according to some classification system, they were no more than manifesting a natural human tendency (or need) to put names on everything. By doing so, we weave an invisible linguistic bridge between us and the world—or, as Heidegger formulated, the Dasein (i.e. the being there or existence)111. Language is a fundamental social process, in which meaning is symbolized in modes that can also be understood and replicated by others. Moreover, language can be altered, it is not a crystalized entity, but in consistence with its collective requisite, that can only occur if others adopt the changes. Otherwise, communication is not possible, and consequently such disengages the production of meaning. The speech is where from new words are fetched, linking to what is for us revealed as new meanings, and how these relate to, or limit our thinking. Old words can be used in unfamiliar ways, or terms can be coined to make a different sense from what would be initially expected. Moreover, words produce different thoughts in different languages. Since there are always subtleties, it is often hard to find a perfect match, except perhaps in the logics-based languages that we use to communicate with machines. In brief, language is the whole (formal) system used in communication, which can be analyzed apart from its use (e.g. in grammar or syntax), and is not complete in any speaker. On the other hand, the speech is the use of language to deliver a thought or accomplish a purpose, is flexible and changing, and is as diverse and varied as the people who use the language. As with Saussure’s language and speech distinction, almost a century later Noam Chomsky would similarly differentiate linguistic competence and linguistic performance, i.e., in brief, the theory we carry on our heads and the practical use we make of it. Another similar distinction can be found between structure and event, i.e., between the abstract systems of rules and the tangible individual occurrences produced within those systems112. As this discussion is progressively detached from natural linguistics, we begin realizing some relational patterns between different elements113, implying a structuralist way of observing phenomena. On their root, is the notion of sign system and its semiotic implications. Saussure’s conception of language as a sign system is installed in a synchronic focus on the relationships of system’s components, and/or with a system as a whole, in a particular state, regardless of changes over history. The sign system is methodologically dividable into two components—the signifier and the signified114. Succinctly, the signifier can be looked as what comes to the mind of the speaker or hearer when the signified is expressed. In other words, the signified can be regarded as a graphical or sound element (e.g. image), and the signifier as the meaning of such element (e.g. concept aroused by image). To illustrate, the words composed by the letters h-o-r-s-e (signified ‘horse’) form a signifier in the mind of English readers evocative of, e.g. a highly domesticated four-legged mammal, which has commonly been adapted to work, ride, entertainment, therapeutic or sport purposes, and so forth

Figure 2. Signifier and signified.

(signifier ‘horse’)115. ‘H-o-r-s-e’ thus expresses a concept with which we had to get acquainted with in some point in our lives. That is why we now know that this particular set of graphemes ‘h-o-r-s-e’ combined make the word ‘horse’ that means what we know as being a horse. So, this ‘horse’ is in fact what we can also call a concept, a mental-image or idea. But to a very same ‘horse’ we can call ‘cavalo’ in Portuguese, ‘caballo’ in Spanish, ‘ ’ in Cantonese, and so forth (Figure 2). We could even call it ‘35’ or ‘24’, or some sort of apparently nonsensical combination of graphemes or phonemes. How- ever, we will no longer be using a previously codified language, we will be making our own codification. Since language only works in a social context, in the least we need two intervenient participating—i.e. a sender and a receiver—besides the codification itself and its knowledgeability by the users. Words are not the only signifiers, it can be a group of words, such as how do you do?, or eventually not even words. What happens is that we are used to signifiers to the point of not questioning them. They are everywhere, in traffic lights and signs; or in gestures we make, shaking hands, smiling, or waving goodbye; screaming of scare or giggling of joy; in the arts, when painting a portrait, making a sculpture, or writing a poem. As reality, they are everywhere, so much to the point of being rendered invisible. For instance, when children begin to distinguish meanings of things, they are in the process of incorporating the signifier, that is, in the process of making it invisible. Similarly, as grow-ups, when we learn a new signifier, we engage in a process of discovery, eventually ending up internalizing it. In our minds, when things are attributed with a name, progressively the name becomes the things named, to the point we do not distinguish it anymore, until it is just one more sign in our (mental) lexicon of signification. Certainly, in ordinary circumstances, the distinction between signifier and signified within a sign system is purely methodological, sustaining a semiotic perspective of language which is analogous to the Kantian dichotomy of phenomenal (mental) and noumenal (material) worlds. Other theorists, such as Charles S. Pierce have conceived the components of the sign system through other relations, in the case expressing a trichotomic, rather than dichotomic dialectic, through sign, object and mind116. The distinction between components works for a language theorist methodology. However, it does not seem to work in concrete use, as we do not experience a signifier which does not signify and vice- versa—in language, each sign is a conjunction of all its components, hence its invisibility as a sign system117. Thereby, in the sense of language as a sign system, every object is both present and absent, where before words make sense, we must make sense out of words, otherwise they are just unknown random graphical elements or unarticulated sounds. For instance, it is plausibly impossible to read San- skrit without ever having seen its graphical representation before, the same applying to any other language. Once a certain sense is established, words become objects on their own, they become absent

and, simultaneously, available to be re-combined, to again become present. That is, from their inter- nalized absence (their state rendered invisible) we will be apt to engage in new meaning. Concomitantly, a thing is never fully there, it is only there to the extent that it appears before us. However, it is not there insofar as its existence is determined by its relation to the whole system of which it is a part. A system that does not appear to us, that it is there but transparently. In this sense, each object, even in its quasi-absence, ultimately reflects the total system, and the total system is present in each of its parts. This intrinsically structuralist outline has been remarkably depicted in Lévi- Strauss’ myth, where broadly it is conceptualized that all mythological stories can be regarded as illustrations of a single one118. In a radical interpretation of this proposal, things could be reduced to elemental relations. If we could affirm that consciousness119 is not the origin of the language we speak and the images we recognize, so much as the product of the meanings we learn and reproduce; conversely, with or without our intervention, surrounding conditions keep changing, modifying the significances that we may take for granted. In a considered individual sign, the change of the surroundings implies a change in the sign as a whole, and hence in all the methodologically split constituents which are embedded in it. Therefore, ultimately the representation of the sign itself will not suffice, leading to a reality where only simulacra can be conceived and all references are shred. The example of Magritte’s paintings eloquently illustrates this line of thought, which ultimately may end up in a sort of nihilism [complement with: Annex, I.5 Down Magritte’s rabbit hole]. Together, sign and its components, make up what Barthes called the lexicon of signification120, which can also be regarded as a satisfactory proof of a particular affiliation to structuralism. That is also an essential notion to analyze manifestations other than those constituent of natural language, as in semiotics. Moreover, it also seems key to analyze onto those other systems or structures which can be understood if regarding language in a broader sense, that is, on the assumption that every signifier— i.e. a natural or artificial thing—can become a sign, as long as if engaged to communicate a message, that is, to signify121.

2.1.2 BUILDING MEANING It is generally acknowledged that structuralism values the deep structures over phenomena, thereby denoting a certain ahistorical universalization of concepts. Yet, such universalization is not full proof, since, as it is reminded by a post-Darwinian perspective, it also must be regarded historically and contingently. To some extent, we could observe structuralism in parallel to the Marxist or the Freudian conceptions, both concerned with fundamental causes—economy and family core respectively—that is, implying that individual man is driven by major forces. In this sense, individual

choice and consciousness would be wiped out, since the background forces or unconscious motiva- tions prevail122. To a degree, that implies that it is out of the scope of the individual to originate or control the bonds of his social or mental existence. In this sense, as it has been implied through Jean- Paul Sartre’s existentialism, structuralism has also been regarded as anti-humanist. However, this radical view is contradictory to the generally acknowledged intents of the structuralist proponents, that regard it more as a humanist proposal rather than its opposite. Because of its focus on the search of essential structures (more related to a certain concept of system, i.e. synchrony), rather than in the evolutionary processes (more related with the concept of evolution, i.e. diachrony), some have labeled structuralism as deterministic, and its outcomes have been regarded as overlooking phenomena and existence. Roughly, in structuralism reality is described has composed not of elements or things, but of relationships. The elements may change, but in a way they retain a dependency on the whole, which they are a part of, and where, regardless, fundamental relationships remain unchanged. Moreover, in this sense, reality is a substrate lying beneath ideas and emphasis is put on the logicality of systems from which meaning is to be constructed. Therefore, structuralism can be regarded as a tendency to focus on the boundaries, on establishing what can be said, meant or thought; or, even more radically, on being reductive, as many complex subjects are seemingly condensed in a few key features, universal structures or truths, which may presumably explain everything, binding humans together, or what humans have in common. How- ever, there are very different approaches to what can be called structuralist thinking, and summing it up in a deterministic path would be ignoring the myriad of surfaces that have been addressed. Wittgenstein, a remarkable logician, aside philosopher, has implied that “knowing everything is equivalent of knowing nothing”, outcomes are starting points, and hence that “philosophy is worthless”, as it is “never ending”, thereby opening a path through the very logicality to relativize even logics own achieve- ments123. By questioning the deepest structures, some of the so-labelled structuralists have also acknowledged their partial role around and within other structures. In this sense, synchrony and diachrony cannot be regarded as opposites, yet recognizing that every system exists as an evolution, and that evolution is a character of a system. Saussure himself regarded both as complementary approaches. Structuralism is also necessarily a label that can be used within many different scopes and contexts, and as in other isms, a label in which many so-labeled would not recognize themselves in. In fact, some were notorious for their critical position towards it, to the point of considering it as a gross violation of freedom of thought. On the one hand, there are those that can be considered Universal- ists—e.g. Lévi-Strauss and Lacan—concerned with the operations performed by the human mind in general, not just with the workings of particular minds at particular times. In that view, behind the diversity of empirical facts, there is a universal mental structure. By contrast, there as those appearing

as relativists—e.g. Foucault or Derrida—worried with the surface where things occur and transform, where things can be re-enacted into the things beyond, not merely concerned with the deep, essential structures124. Regardless the greater or lesser criticism, regardless the different modes of approach, all share a vocabulary that is related with modes of producing meaning. That derives in last resort from Sausurre’s work125, whose core proposals bear the idea that the production of meaning fundamentally depends on language, particularly emphasizing into the nature of the essence of any language. As put by Sartre, “existence precedes essence”126. The existentialists regard the human subject—how he thinks, acts, feels, lives, and so on—and its role in the bringing meaning to life, as a center reference, source and outcome, for the immanence of knowledge. They sustain that there is no predefined pattern, where we must fit into; that we must create our own meaning, place our own value on our acts, and that our individual freedom is absolute and unbounded. In structuralism, unlike in an exis- tentialist perspective, in many ways man is no longer regarded as a reference point. The totality of things, the structure, acquires a predominance over man’s autonomy as a creator and giver of significance: the ego dies. It is not about man as a creator, yet the unconscious collective awareness that constitutes man as an object in itself. We, and It is, replaces the I. As in Lavoisier’s ancient expression, there is no creation, but transformation. In structuralism, man is a part of a system that precedes its existence and, too, will endure after, at least until there is a trace of humanity left. This is nonetheless a radical view of structuralism, which may ultimately lead to a dangerous ground, where references can be hard to attain. Criticism came from the realm of art or literature, as the structuralist view seemed to imply a loss in creativity. The view of Man’s freedom could be seen as ever entangled in the restrains of a system. However, as Sartre analyzed, the value of structural thinking could also be regarded not in opposition but in relation with man. Roughly, the important is not the man within the structure, yet what man makes of the things that are made out of him. What is important is to realize that man’s doings are immanent history (i.e. evolution, transformation) and that that is also (and fundamentally) the matter of what structures are made of. This is not to be seen in either black or white. These are unrepeatable cycles made of ever-changing states, which may or may not reflect recognizable patterns. Structuralism acknowledges the structure, but it is not reductive, since it does not limit, instead it opens the door to, e.g., a poststructuralist understanding. Conversely, the poststructuralist proposal generally implies that the knowledge of the things around us is not only derived from the things themselves, yet produced through filters rendered invisible to us, through the symbolizing systems, there, (un)awarely inscribed. It implies an account on how meaning is processed, but it also states a fundamental distinction between human beings and other animals, which is the capability to recognize difference, and, by such, build meaning. Other animals can also be social, but they are not cultural, as they produce nor transmit no meaning in a

cultural sense, at least not one that can likely be accessible from a human perspective127. Such would find echo, for instance in Foucault’s discussion of subject and identity128, or Lacan’s idea of human beings as organism in-culture129. Structure is an ancient word, long used in anatomical or grammatical circles. Yet, as Barthes ex- pressed130, the linguistic model originated by Saussure, along with the economics of a Marxist origin, have become in a great deal, the true science of structure. As an intellectual meta-language, the use of the word structuralism applies to an approach, where a structuralist vision is constituted. Even if refuting its labelling, its awareness, in a sense, makes its user structural. Yet structuralism is not a school or movement, making it useless trying to find a common corpus. Nonetheless, there is certainly a structural way of making things, in painting, writing, music, and so on, and one that does not need to be recognized as such. A structural way is not necessarily a formal way, in the sense that is reflected on a certain approach or result to form, as for instance the Russian Construtivist approach might denote. It is a mental way, or activity, not a formal way, certainly a lot closer, for instance, to the sort pointed by Malevich’s Black Square, where the apparent simplicity of the structure seemingly entails all possi- bilities131. The goal, if a goal is there to be set, is to reconstruct an object, manifesting its rules of functioning. For instance, Wittgenstein did it through logic, while acknowledging logics limitations132. As Barthes wrote, “structural man takes the real, decomposes it, and then recomposes it”133. In this process, something new is added which has a different value, i.e., creation, or evolution occurs. That may indicate a copy or mimesis of the original object, which is taken and added to at least another order to make a seemingly new one. Yet structuralism is not about a homology of the initial object and its state—a pure homo- logical development would likely indicate an entropic (de)gradation of the (original) object. It is instead a reconstruction from the understanding of its (apparent) fundamentals, heterologically and relationally confronted with a different object or surrounding. What matters is not necessarily the nature of the object, or its essence, yet what is added to it, i.e., the process in which the object is recomposed, and through it acquires a different meaning. What matters is the path, not the destination, life above its unavoidable ends. It is about what Barthes called the “structuralist activity”134, that is, man’s modes of producing meaning, of constructing culture, … of living. The idea can be exemplified with the relation of language with the construction of myth. We can create new meanings and concepts, which do not necessarily need to be attached to what we may perceive as facts of the real or reality, or even to what we may call truth. All of this constitutes part of a human construction, and we can apply it to any kind of language—to a graphical language, to a spoken or written language, or even to body language (the dancer’s movement, the musician’s interaction with his instrument), and so forth. Indeed, as we leave the realm of language, adding layers upon layers of signs, we can say that somewhat we are entering the realm of myth, since the (III) Myth is not

Figure 3. From Myth to form.

necessarily a truth, certainly not a fact of what we can assume as being real. Instead, we can make the equivalence between myth and sign, i.e. a codified representation (Figure 3). Then, again, everything is a sign, that our brain apprehends, interprets or represents—as de Pierce said, “nothing is a sign unless it is interpreted as a sign”135. Whatever the apparent degree of essentiality of the approach, as Jacques Lacan expressed, “the signifier does not designate what it is not there, it engenders it”136. Under the signifier there is nothing or a quasi-absence. By dissecting an object, as the specialization has been making, the ultimate goal is reaching the fragment, which can be, e.g., a basic geometric shape, or a phoneme (and even those can potentially be reduced even more). The dissection produces a dispersion (fragmentation) but not necessarily an anarchy, as the re-distribution of the fragment, so implied in its meaning construction, is conducted by a sovereign principle which embeds difference, for minimal the difference may be. That difference guides a process of association. As in Kant’s architectonic, a structuralist activity articulates the fragment onto a fragment-plus, that is, onto a system, or structure, or what other terminology or convention may be in use. To the basic fragment, a series of devised rules, more or less explicit, more or less iteratively developed, guide a combinatorial process by which form (of speech, of music, of painting, and so on) is created, and that is nonetheless limited by the subject’s ability to acknowledge them. It is truly a simulacrum process137, where the world ends up rendered differently from what it was found, and yet is not necessarily new. In fact, it does not seem relevant to know whether a newly appeared object is new or not, but, again, the relevance seems to be in the path, or process. Although form is the entire thing as implied by Saussure, and regardless Russel’s paradox, which puts the issue in an irresolvable loop, what is relevant is not the form, but the meaning, because ultimately the meaning is its production. The structuralist activity is not about the fragments, the meaning of each individual fragment, nor a universal essence. The fact, totally isolated, is as useless as its extreme generalization. What matters is not if it is new, but the humanistic production that it proceeds. Taking Barthes’ expression, what matters is not the meaning of the fragment, but Man fabricating meanings, the Homo Significans138. The term modern can help to elucidate this argument. Between a process of denotation (i.e. of non- coded iconic message) and of connotation (i.e. coded iconic message), distinction can be difficult to attain, since connotation comes so immediate and natural that becomes extremely difficult to distinguish both terms139. As other terms, modern tendentiously follows Saussure’s notion of difference in negative terms—i.e. what is modern is not ancient, not medieval, not antique, or not traditional140. It distinguishes a period by the negative of another. Yet, paradoxically, by associating modern to a specific period of the first half of the XXth century, as it occurs with modernism, and concurrently, detaching it by naming a succedaneum postmodernism, modernity becomes a thing of the past, when in its essence modern is

nonetheless consensually connoted with new141. Indeed, modern can be seen through the negative difference towards old, or, as with new, by pairing with relatives. Nonetheless, such denotation is instantaneous (immediately volatilized), a fragment re-built with meaning in the fragment-plus connotation. For the Homo Significans, the word modern can mean many things. That is prove of a cultural (communal) richness as brought about by a diversity of insights, not of purely anarchically spread fragments, since that is subjected to language, hence to be shared, as language does not exist in a single subject. The ancient atomists sought to unveil the essences in nature. However, the Demiurgical answer of their ontological quest has proven not to suffice. Embroiled in the shades of Plato’s cave, the answers seem to only be graspable by the appearances of the images: no being, nor exactitude, just appearances. Analogously to the cave allegory, the ancient Indian parable of the blind men and the elephant also illustrates a range of truths and fallacies that are implied in the subjective experience. The story has different versions, but essentially tells that a group of blind men touches an elephant to get to know what it is like. Each touches a different part, then compare the description of their part with others, ending up in complete disagreement. Primarily, the stories vary on how each part is described. Soon they enter in conflict. In some versions this escalates, becoming unresolvable, in others they stop talking, and slowly start listening, collaborating to see the whole elephant. A sighted man passes by, observing the full elephant and then describing it. With it, they also learn they are blind. One’s subjective experience can be true, but may not be the whole true. If the sighted man could not touch, he could not feel the beast as the blinds’ did; if he could not smell, his experience, and hence the meaning produced, would also be truncated; if he could not hear he would additionally may not become aware of the blinds’ discussion. Even if fully aware, he still certainly would be ignoring something, because in the least looks can be deceiving. As Werner Heinsenberg once stated, “we have to remember that what we observe is not nature in itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning”142. Indeed, the social and the cultural Man is a human construction, which differentiates us from other animals, and that ultimately lays in the distinction between organism and subject. Each individual of the natural world has inherited characteristics, which result of ages of evolution, and these develop, amplify or fade in interaction with the milieu. Addi- tionally, the human subject is too an effect of culture, a result rather than an origin, and in that sense more likely to reproduce a range of uncertainties and beliefs than to resolve them. In that sense, if we lay claim to a certain truth, we are defining what we believe, but what we believe is not purely personal, yet a conviction that is proceeded through an inculcated culture. From here, it can be assumed that we are the result of something Other, alterity beings. However, knowledge does not go on without a subject, since we are unavoidably linked to both an upstream and a downstream Other, since in ourselves we are too an Other: subject-is-the-object-is-the-subject, alterity all around.

When the death of the author is claimed, as it has been by the poststructuralists, is as acknowledging what can be an easily forgotten evidence that the author is a reader, and in that sense that no work is universal, or no single interpretation is possible. There are unavoidable tautologies, but as the text changes from reader to reader, reading moment to reading moment, the structural Homo Significans too knows its very structuralism will change. As Barthes wrote, “structuralism, too, is a certain form of the world, which will change with the world; and just as he [structural man] experiences his validity (but not his truth) in his power to speak the old languages of the world in a new way, so he knows that it will suffice that a new language rise out of history, a new language which speaks to him in his turn”143. Implicitly challenging the Cartesian architectural utopia, structuralism has remarkably expounded the impossibility of a truly objective judgment, since we are all prisoners of language. In the absence of a last resource God, or any other ontological cornerstone, transcendent source of meaning for phenomena, there is no greater significance; instead, there is a continuously reshaped open loop of movement and structure, …of life. Such arguably carried profound implications in culture’s episteme. In time, a Cartesian view was replaced by a relational new monistic view, which inevitably called also for different aesthetics. The art movements in the early XXth century had began disclosing a shift from the Cartesian representation to a relational new-monism144. In the literary author-reader relationship, the reader too acquired a new relevance as builder of significance—i.e. all authors are readers, and conversely all readers are authors. In relativity’s relationality, space-time begins and ends in the subject. Conceptually, among such a fragmentation, can there still be room for architecture to truly be?

2.2 Research trends of a structuralist affinity [vernacular, natural, normative, numerical]

In the 1950’s and 1960’s the influence of structuralist thought was already well spread across Europe and the USA and began to influence architectural thinking in this period. Lévi-Strauss’ work in anthropology had popularized the structuralist approach to a wider audience. The study of folk narratives or myths of traditional cultures inevitably also drew attention to their built forms. In a retrospective look to his own work, in Myth and Meaning (1978), Lévi-Strauss affirmed: “Notwithstanding the cultural differences between the several parts of mankind, the human mind is everywhere one and the same and that it has the same capacities… I don’t think that cultures have tried systematically or methodically to differentiate themselves from each other. The fact is that for hundreds of thousands of years mankind was not very numerous on the earth; small groups were living in isolation, so that it was only natural that they developed characteristics of their own and became different from each other. It was not something aimed at. Rather, it is the simple result of the conditions which have been prevailing for an extremely long time”145. The arguments can help explain the diversity of human forms of habitat, framed under an evolutionary perspective, but also it can ultimately indicate a way towards a seemingly inescapable global homogenization. In any case, if there were deep structures organizing basic human aspects, with social and cultural manifestations, it seemed reasonable to consider that the built environment, a human creation, would too be influenced by these. These notions induced a great impression in some architects and theorists at that epoch146, with the study of the built environment overlapping many different disciplines—cultural geography, anthropology, history, urban planning, ethnography, cross-cultural studies, behavioral sciences, or architecture itself147. The developments signaled a research trend of structuralist inspiration, marked by travels to remote places, documenting ancient and remote cultures, or by the observation of natural structures. The observation of archaic vernacular built environments, embedded of an age-old wisdom, became an important subject of analysis148 which carried valuable lessons to architectural production: a sense of essentiality, of proven, established and adapted forms, validated by ages of evolution. Typically, the pre-industrial vernacular constructions can be described as made of economic principles, using locally available resources, with simple but effective construction methods. These are adjusted to the physical, social and cultural needs, as well as to the local climate, but also depict a strong resilience based in a morphological adaptability, by successive addition and transformation over time. The resulting forms are precise, in the sense that are directly reflecting the natural context, as well as the needs and life experiences originating them. By their truthfulness and simplicity, many of their principles can be easily recognizable. For instance, in different climates, in some cases the roofs are highly sloped, to face rain and snow, whereas in others they are flat and are often used as terraces to dry cereals in sunny times. The forms are organically exact, placed just where they belong,

59 reflecting their contingencies. They are not planned or imposed, but additive (i.e. added in time, according to need) and are kept in close watch, cared, as there is no greater driving force than pure necessity149. However, these processes are not necessarily purely deterministic, as in the anthropological functionalism sense expressed by Bronisław Malinowski, since they also hold unpredictability and chance, and drive signification construction modes. For instance, at cases, a personal statement, a higher resource availability, or by no particular reason, a more elaborate expressiveness, or decorative imprint is manifested. In turn, this may or not be subsequently further reproduced, either eventually installing a new tradition branch, or simply standing as a one-off case. The material formalization through construction is subjected to processes of choice that are not only constrained by a natural context, but also by the evolution of cultural processes related with “fashion, tradition, religious proscription, or prestige value”150. For instance, the use of wood construction may be pervasive in places where forests are abundant, but certainly, a traditional Japanese wood building carries a different pathos than a traditional North American wood building, even if the materials and technologies in use are somewhat similar. Indeed, construction practices are not merely biological in the sense of strictly answering to survival needs or natural conditions, but intrinsically of a cultural ballast. For instance, most probably the primitive cities were not biologically better to live in than in the countryside, as cities were more prone to diseases, and so forth. Nevertheless, these cities were culturally attractive, because in the least they embodied the idea of an improved knowledge exchange, which favored the development of crafts and the like, or because people came from squalor, and thus cities symbolized [the promise of] a better life. Anyhow, the idea of vernacular is unavoidably linked with an evolutionary stance of cultural practices, as these embody in the artifact what in biology natural selection represents to species—anthropologists call it evolutionary anthropol- ogy151. The perspective is that cultural practices guide an artificial selection, or selective breeding process where humans intentionally chose specific traits based on their knowledge gathered in time. Therefore, as memes, vernacular buildings embody a process carried and spread from person to person within a culture that too is evolving152. The study of archaic cultures, together with extensive travel reports was certainly not a novelty in the 1950s and 1960s, when the vernacular becomes an important subject of research. In science, the practices of the XIXth century naturalists had been embedded of a similar spirit. The travels and documentations of some of the XXth century architects would too display a certain exoticism of built structures, portrayed in bold photos or impressive sketches, poetical synthesis that fascinated the audience. Traveling and recording the great buildings and built environments of the past had long been a widespread practice, marking architectural thinking and production in modern times153. The famous Grand Tour, which became democratized as railways became pervasive, attests it. Le Corbu-

sier’s The Voyage to the East (1966)154 is probably the most famous account of that way among architects along the XXth century. However, the curiosity on the vernacular or in popular building forms, although not new, apparently became more intense than ever. The frugal and sincere beauty, evocative of a certain atavism, certainly impressed a public avid for the [old] unseen, and perhaps tired of a certain modernist orthodoxy. One of the icons of such re- cordings would be Bernard Rudofsky’s superbly photographed Architecture Without Architects: A Short Introduction to Non-pedigreed Architecture (1964)155. To a certain extent, the archaic vernacular became a methodic ideal for the new, as from an exogenous perspective, its buildings and values apparently depict social and psychological well-being, seemingly perfectly adjusted to their setting. In this sense, vernacular’s synchronic qualities, i.e. its universalist, evolutionarily tested values, became theme and validation-in-history of a trend of new proposed forms. Ascribing to the precursor steps of D’Arcy Thompson’s On Growth and Form (1917)156, the Darwinistic analogy would also be driven to the observation of natural structures themselves, in the search for naturally validated models to apply in the production of the built environment. Besides the appealing imagistic, the idea of a vernacular reestablishes a sense of place construction. The example of the Arquitectura Popular em Portugal [“Popular Architecture in Portugal”] (1961)157 enquire attests it, signaling a research trend for the age-old knowledge provided by the vernacular practices towards a redefinition of the modernist approach. Modern architecture, wisely adapted to the place, while qualified by artisanal objects, would subsequently enter the vocabulary of the Portuguese architectural practice. Fernando Távora´s Casa de Ofir (1958), or Álvaro Siza’s Casa de Chá da Boa Nova (1964) are a proof of a wise approach to the setting, while providing it with a modern expression, which has as much of powerful, as of subtle. It is an expression truthful both to [the representation of a] place and to a design language with its own authorial, artistic idiosyncrasies. With different shades, namely a reconciliatory view between nature and machine, such a softened sense of place had already been explored by some referential modern architects, as Frank Loyd Wright or Alvar Aalto. Wright’s Broadacre City (sub)urban concept, envisioned a landscape gathering both nature and the machine, expressed in the artificial layout of the fields or a productive condition of the territory. With it, in a way, there was no longer a city, as the city was everywhere: for the adventurous, the nomadic, inspiring freedom and movement, entangled by multiple roads and highways, telecommunication lines, flow paths158. It was hence a communication city, in which each point could potentially be connected to all others, and in which nature appeared as a continuous medium, receptacle of the entire system, where all components are ought to work organically159. In that sense, Wright’s Falling- water (1935) was both archetypal and prototypical, as it established an ideal (and idyllic) bond of natural and artificial spheres. With the Broadacre City, it was also implied an understanding that modernity was not only in the city, but could hypothetically be everywhere, as all the territory is, in potential, to

61 be cultivated by Man. Richard Neutra had already implied it in one of the initial CIAM meetings, setting a case for a liberalized modernity160. Wright’s Usonian houses would reiterate the idyllic, and its implied political worldview of Broadacre City, but adding the dimension of design-constructive system, stressing the intention to make houses affordable to a large part of the population—the concept was inaugurated with the Jacobs house (1936), and would be accompanied by the Usonian Manifesto, published in the Architectural Forum in January 1938161. With it, design systems, types, function or technology are not to be opposed to a concept of place. Generic purposed design and construction systems, allied to firm and respectful intentionality towards a specific setting, are too conceivable in a peaceful coexistence between a sort of universalism and a place-aware stance. In Usonia, systems were no limitations, yet a way to embrace difference in a technological dialogue with nature162, a condition that would notably be followed in propositions such as Albert Frey’s living architecture [complement with: Annex, I.6 Albert Frey’s nature and industry synthesis]. In a different context, the work of Alvar Aalto was too seduced by the world of living nature as an architectural metaphor163. In his view, the economic set of the vernacular built forms can only be surpassed by the greater essentiality of nature’s forms. His buildings adopt additive forms adapted to place. Aalto’s works come in line with a Nordic way epitomized in Erik Gunnar Asplund’s, which broadly develops a synthetic relation with place, joining both the classical tradition and a modern stance, as had been eloquently depicted in the Skogskyrkogården [“Woodland Cemetery”] (1935-1940). Aalto’s work was functional, but not mechanist, yet with a purposive intention forming and framing human activity. A staircase can simply be functional, or bind conditions and experience, building and topography, acting as place for social interaction—Villa Marea’s (1939) iconic stair, certainly an- nounces something other than function. Aalto spoke of an extended rationalism comprising a reconciliatory attitude on both human164 and natural165 circumstances166. The Nordic way would find a remarkable legacy in Jørn Utzon’s works, gathering influences coming both from the vernacular and the natural forms, engaged in a sphere of productive efficiency, as expressed in his Additive Architecture manifesto167 [complement with: Annex, I.7 The Additive Architecture of Jørn Utzon and the Espansiva System]. The appeal of the archaic vernacular, as depicted in Bernard Rudofsky’s photographic account or as portrayed in the humanist essence and natural-artificial bonds of Wright’s or Aalto’s works, finds a parallel in the appeal of the ordinary vernacular elements of the built environment. For instance, in the CIAM 9, the Smithson’s exhibit photos of London street life by Nigel Henderson, illustrating their cherished as found concept, that is, the remembrances, the fabric of ordinary traces and scars of a place, which give it a particular feel, energy, character168. To a degree, the idea of the as found agreed with the main canons of modernism in terms of refusal of ornamentation, search of structural purity and, above all, truthfulness in the use of materials169. Materials ought to be used and seen as they

were. Buildings were to treat the site as an as found object. The signification levels were to be found and built upon the proposed buildings. Other semiotic implications would also be expressed in works as Kevin Lynch’s The Image of the City (1960)170 or Gordon Cullen’s Townscape (1961)171. As in Aalto’s case, modernity was not to be understood from an idealized utopia enfolded by abstract, geometrical compositions. The available patterns and urban fabrics were ought to be transformed, not sponged out and converted into a formal abstraction. What it fundamentally changed was the view of the everyday, the valuation of the ordinary as an endless source of wisdom for the architectural production. A related arising trend, endorsed an architecture that should be less about control and more about empowering a participatory role of the unfolding life. In a sense, architecture was no longer to be about high-pedigree buildings, or grand urban solutions. Instead, it should be holistically engaged in the broader scope of the built environment, and its ordinary forms, wiping out the old high/low architecture narrative. Many theoretical developments reflected these concerns. Amos Rapoport applied anthropological studies to habitability, laying the idea that the physical environment of man, particularly the built environment, is so complex, and overlapping so many disciplines, that has not been, still is not, and hardly will ever be controlled by the designer172. John Turner stressed the role of user participation through an enquiry on societal control levels towards the built environment173, and a related self- building line would be pursued by Walter Segal174 [complement with: Annex, I.8 John Turner’s network and hierarchy]. John Habraken, and the work developed among the SAR (Foundation for Architects Research) group, led the concept to another level, where a fundamental distinction was made through the hierarchies of the support and the infill concept175 [complement with: Annex, I.9 John Habraken’s Supports]. Stewart Brand would add a new perspective to the support and infill distinction towards the design of buildings acknowledging different hierarchy and timespans of levels and the user participation in each level176. Among the developments177, it is also important to refer what is a certain re-enactment of the discourse on the type. The topic can broadly be summed up as an inquiry into the deep, general structures, paralleling the linguistics’ synchronism, and be included in an overall development of a normative perspective, developed from a research on systems. The research on type is too linked with a recovery of history. The early notions of Quatremère de Quincy (b.1755-d.1849) had set the terminological base for type. Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand’s (b.1760-d.1834) comprehensive depiction of types echoed the influence of a series of renaissance treaties, such as Serlio’s practical treatise, and by that following an academic line that can be traced back to Vitruvius’. To a certain extent, modernism had ruptured this line, determined in abolishing the imitative character embodied in a ‘demonized’ Beaux Arts. The recovery of a type discourse thus followed the need to inscribe a social and cultural dimension into architecture, a purpose that modernism had somewhat deviated from its priorities.

63 The intrinsically normative type enabled both an analytical and a projective purpose, a tool to analyze history, and conversely to design architecture. Tafuri defined the typological critique, as a trend insisting on the formal invariants differentiated from the analytical masters of functionalism by its historicist character178. With L’Architettura della Città179 and La Costruzione Logica dell’ Architettura180, between 1966 and 1967, Aldo Rossi and Giorgio Grassi reevaluate architecture, which should thereon be grounded into an understanding of the building types distinguishing the modern European city181. They asserted the inevitability of rationalism based on the generative potential of the types, with an historical twist. The rational methodology of type was not to be one of functional measure. Instead, it should set up architecture as measure of architecture, expounding its lineage and future outcomes through a record of autonomous principles, and thus essentially structuralist. Without interference, architecture may inadvertently (and dangerously) end up in a kind of self-referenced/redundant de- rivability, enclosed in a typological loop, where there is no real new input, but a sort of empty play of forms, i.e., ultimately, a dead language. With the Broadacre City Wright had implied nature in the city and in a larger territorial view, within a liberal idea of land and production of built form182, and Aalto had referred to “nature as the best standardization committee”, ascribing to a genetic tree of human artifacts where industrialization of processes and forms completes the picture. Approaches to natural principles were also profusely addressed in the development of building structures, binding together architecture and engineering angles. In brief, as some structuralist sought for human patterns and gave an anthropological look to relations as a leitmotiv of architectural production, namely in observing the vernacular built forms, others sought for patterns and relations in the natural world. For many in the latter path D’Arcy Wenthworth Thompson’s (b.1860-d.1948) On Growth and Form (1917) stood as a seminal reference. In this line, the search into the structural qualities of natural forms would find pioneer references among the practical and theoretical works of Antoni Gaudi (b.1852-d.1926), Friedrich Kiesler (b.1890-d.1965), Robert Le Ricolais (b.1894-d.1977), Buckminster Fuller (b.1895-d.1983), Frei Otto (b.1925) or Emilio Pérez Piñero (b.1935-d.1972). Using design models that investigate rules of structure or self-formation, processes and shape formations were drawn from an observing curiosity in nature’s forms and principles. Architectural models delivered visual evidence of force flows that prompted towards analytical descriptions of the structures. The tangible experiments anticipated computer analysis, and provided base for derived design techniques. It was also a search for optimal structures, of building lighter to achieve the biggest spans as in Otto’s Münich Stadium (1972), to comprise the biggest volume as in Fuller’s Geodesic Domes, or to achieve both in self-erecting deployable structures as in Piñero’s unbuilt designs for NASA of portable greenhouses for the moon. The examples denote a shift from architectural language, or from a normative typology, towards the tactility of materiality and reaction to contextual impacts. Approaches spanned from establishing

64 boundary conditions from where forms would be freely devised, to structuring devising processes according to rule sets differentiating relationships between form, mass and force. Broadly, in materiality, stressed systems tend to optimize themselves, and depending on strengths, by modulating den- sities, different behaviors and responses could be detected and calibrated towards a numerical objectification. If, in a first stage, such objectification served as a validating tool for construction purposes, analogous principles have also more recently been re-engaged in service of algorithmic ruled itera- tions. In a different line, Christopher Alexander’s works brought in approaches from mathematics and computer science, using set theory, graph theory and early computer tools, emphasizing the interaction between people and the environment, to attain an abstraction of vernacular architectural concepts. With Notes on the Synthesis of Form (1964), it was emphasized a numerical rationalism into solving design problems, defining a design problem as the “requirements which have to be met”. Among these requirements, were interdependent relationships that made them extremely hard to fulfill. By methodologically mapping and analyzing relationships, the structure of the problem was to be brought about logically. As other observers of the built environment, Alexander has broadly documented how patterns may be recognized from and towards structuring our environments. It has significantly been an inspiration to architects, engineers or theoreticians, but it has also been criticized by what may be called a prescriptive dimension and an underlying aesthetically biased stance. Nonetheless, the work is invaluable for its linkages between archaic and ordinary built environments and the widespread materialism of modernist society expressed towards a digital sphere. An important part of the legacy of the research onto a numerical objectification of the structural qualities of natural or vernacular derived observations has been foundational in terms of a more recent use of algorithmic digital tools, manifested in a search onto form via sets of rules and constrains, or on the problem of the automated space layout. The first developments start in the late 1960s, but it was only in the turn of the millennium, and with democratized internet communication, that progresses have boosted. Notwithstanding, crossing the data values with emotional needs or aspirations is a task still in its inceptions, as evidenced by the case seemingly basic, yet complex problem of the automated architectural layout183.

65 2.3 Structuralist related forms

The formal approaches that can be related to a structuralist sphere, find its first acknowledgeable developments in the architectural panorama of the 1960s. These have been implied around many different labels and groups—such as New Brutalism, Dutch Structuralism, Megastructures, Metabolism, Situ- acionism, Archigram, and so on—although not necessarily manifesting a particular structuralist affiliation. The labelling is often unclear, with different terms sometimes referring to similar concerns, but addressed by different groups. Around the prolific 1960s, some of the most remarkable and imagi- native signal inputs were revealed by the fertile production of resurgent utopian proposals184. Exam- ples are abundant, as is the case of the Smithsons’ city plan for Berlin (1958), as well as Yona Fried- man’s Raumstadt (1961) or Spatial City (1961), or in some of the Metabolist proposals such as Kenzō Tange’s Tokyo Bay Plan (1960). As also observed in the natural structures, the use of additive principles derived from the vernacular observation seemingly involved a limited array of related elements organized in a limited array of variants, disposed through certain sets of rules. For instance, in earlier times, the Fibonacci sequence had also been used in the Modulor from the belief that natural principles follow structural, universal principles185. With greater or lesser degree, similar principles as those entailed by Aldo Van Eyck’s aesthetics of number would be paralleled in other architectural proposals. Aldo Van Eyck’s Orphanage (1970), Louis Kahn’s Richards Medical Center (1965), or Herman Hertzberger’s Diagoon (1971), figure among the numerous examples where this sort of underlay can be clearly recognized. Formally, these generally reflected an architectural conception made of more or less flexible layouts of switchable but normally well-defined modulation. Space arrangements are combined by sets of rules and hier- archized according to expected patterns of use and the elements of form normally reflect a concern in establishing clear articulations, for instance, distinguishing load bearing from non-load bearing elements or service spaces from servant spaces. The ties between Team 10’s concepts such as the hierarchies of association, a concern for cultural identity, or an acknowledgement of urban life through the relationships established by its inhabitants, assign to a key idea of primacy of relations over things valued in the structuralism of the humanities. The actions taken by Team 10 members to create formally complex large-scale systems able to adapt to the city and the landscape led to different formal logics. The split can generally be placed between a certain formalistic approach, which can be foremost recognized in the Smithson’s proposals, and a clearer inner intentionality in Van Eyck’s or Candilis’s. On the one hand, as in the Smithson’s Robin Hood Gardens housing complex in Poplar, East London (1972), it is portrayed a certain interest in solving the emotional issues by designing spaces for casual social encounters whenever possible, with hybrid spaces, not entirely public nor private, where socialization could occur, through elements such as elevated pedestrian decks in mega-structural blocks.

66 However, in a way, such was not much more than a continuity of the modernist approach in the sense of imposing top-down design solutions, where the modern block was little more than disguised, with slightly more sophisticated spatial sociability solutions186. On the other hand, a resolute shift from a certain alienating abstraction brought about by modernism and its tendency of top-down design, to make an architecture open to its user, freed of design impositions, where there is a well- defined upper structuration that nonetheless enables users to freely engage in appropriating space. The Smithson’s as found concept placed a new ethic stance, regarding the observation of the built environment, cherishing its most ordinary and/or potentially unaware characteristics. On the other hand, with the celebration of the natural qualities, as expressed in their woodiness of wood; sandiness of sand187, it was implied a distinctive aesthetical stance. The preference for raw materials, such as in-situ concrete, would give rise to a somewhat imposing architecture. In the end, the approach would be labeled New Brutalism, which implied negative connotations. Reyner Baham coined the term in his 1955 essay The New Brutalism, making reference to what he called a tendency to “look toward Le Corbusier and to be aware of something called ‘le beton brut (and) l’ Architecture, c’est, avec des Matieres Bruts, etablir des rapports emouvants’ ”188. It is a naked, crude architecture, where the Miesian more to achieve less allegedly does not take place189, where things are supposed to be presented as they are, with no masks or disguises. It seems the ism of the brut is also linked to an idea of rupture with a certain functionalist approach. It does so using a discourse that employs vocabulary such as connectivity and flow, looking towards different aesthetical conceptions, where design values such as image and composition acquire a new intentionality that does not necessarily ascribe to the classical notions. From that point, topology can gain relevance to a radical point of superseding geometry—where a brick can be regarded as equivalent to a billiard ball. However, a literal use of topology redounds in complete relativity, in amorphous, non-definable forms. With topology, a threshold is crossed, where architecture ultimately can no longer use concepts such as proportion and symmetry. In it, there is also no scale, opening up a perspective into a digital field where dimensions collide in numerical codification, the algebraic strength of vectors making a door handle equivalent to an entire building or a city. Conversely, that can also be referred on the perspective of an a-formalism as a positive force, as expressed in their contemporary artistic works of Alberto Burri (b.1915-d.1995) of Magda Cordell’s (b.1921-d.2008). Reyner Banham writes: “Even if it were true that the ‘Brutalists’ speak only to one another, the fact that they have stopped speaking to Mansart, to Palladio and to Alberti would make ‘The New Brutalism’, even in its more private sense, a major contribution to the architecture of today”190. New aesthetical conceptions were also implied in what has been described as mat-buildings, a reference credited to Alison Smithson in the article How to Recognise and Read Mat-Building. Mainstream

67 Architecture as it has Developed Towards the Mat-Building (1974). The first designs to have such label assigned were both developed by George Candilis, Alexis Josic and Shadrach Woods, all disciples of Le Corbusier that founded their own office between 1955 and 1963, and where all at some point active participants in Team 10. They participated in two competitions, one for the Free University in Berlin (1963, and concluded ten years later), the other to the Römerberg in Frankfurt (1963). Among other designs that can also be ascribed to a mat-building formulation, can be noted Le Corbusier’s project for Venice Hospital (1964-65)191 or Van Eyck’s Orphanage in Amsterdam (1960). Mat-buildings apparently use different compositional philosophies of those of the early modernists. Geometrically they can be characterized as high-density, large-scale structures, organized through more or less regulated grids. However, above all, there is an underlying general, topological order influencing the disposition of units, which often share similar morphological characteristics. These principles can be related to what has been called kasbahism, a notion ascribed to the historical Kasbah urban structures, where buildings become less objects in themselves and more of elements of a larger structure. With its topological order, the larger structure prevails, even if orphan of some individual elements. With it, the overall form is an open-form192. As in the Kasbah, in mat-buildings the possibility to endure change seems to be one of the characteristics that are primarily cherished193. Despite a generic, topological character, metrics can nonetheless be important in these structures—Berlin, Frankfurt and Venice projects all share the use of Le Corbusier’s Modulor194. However, these are just referential towards a formalization, as in a way these very same designs could easily be something else without losing their identity. There is an inner resemblance, using similar but apparently diverse units, which the immersed user is to experience as varied. As in an algorithm, this is achieved by combinatorial processes, enabling the creation of complex relations through the iteration of relatively simple rules. The resemblance of the seemingly diverse units is too one of a Vitruvian echo, placing house and city, unit and larger form, in a direct bond, sharing an identical nature, one on which the mat-building provides a structural synthesis. This idea is strengthened by the open-endedness of the program. In Alison Smithson’s words: “Mat-building can be said to epitomize the anonymous collective; where the functions come to enrich the fabric, and the individual gains new freedoms of action through a new and shuffled order, based on interconnection, close-knit patterns of association, and possibilities for growth, diminution, and change”195. From here, ultimately it makes no sense to consider forms aprioristically, yet human activities which will eventually define them. In this sense, in the mat-building form does not follow function. On the contrary, with it, the city is relational, not functional, and it is not [merely] elevated in pilotis over a green land. It is a built form in a permanent coming-to-be, spreading and absorbing any variation. In it, there is no place for singularity, except that of the system [and an equivalent structure] regulating the process. Similarly, analogous concerns

would too be present in the larger scale, as is the case with the territorial cluster-forms, with their sequential and open shapes, tending to a spinal growth towards the exterior. In the mat-buildings forms repeat and intersect, growing horizontally from within, until an inter- twined structure and a flexible mesh is formed. The functional indeterminacy allows a seemingly endless growth and repetition, in an implied reference to evolutionary principles influenced by historical structures. There is no longer a grid in the modernist sense, but a regulating mechanism that is asymmetric, non-repetitive, and organic: a relational grid, following relativity’s geometries. From the Cartesian inspiration of Neo-plasticism or Purism, it was now time to embrace the free forms, as those portrayed by the abstract expressionism. As the Smithson’s write in Urban Structuring (1967), it was time to “observe the paintings of Pollock or the sculptures of Paolozzi”196. It was time to rethink the lexicon of the [inevitable] forms required by architecture to tangibly come about. Outside Team 10 other related ideas developed, influenced by Louis Kahn (b.1901-d.1974) in the USA, or Kenzo Tange (b.1913-d.2005) in Japan. The Metabolists in Japan197, developed architectural formal concepts that included growth, change, flexibility, interchangeability, group forms or clusters, differentiation between primary and secondary structures or the role of transportation routes. Given such characteristics, the proposals undoubtedly echo the Dutch school, namely Habraken’s supports theory. Kenzo Tange’s utopian Tokyo Bay Plan was probably one of the most famous Metabolist proposal. It had too an unavoidable visual and conceptual affinity with the mat-buildings. Tange proposes a linear structure with many smaller centers. The structure works at several levels and with the possibility of different implementation degrees. There is the linear connection between Tokyo and the expansion, linking it to the existing transportation routes. In the central spine runs a civic core of office buildings traversing horizontally between vertical service hubs. Perpendicularly, a series of ar- raying ribs supporting housing. It is a vision of a future, which too, as in the mat-buildings, entails an open-endedness conception. In 1962, Kisho Kurokawa, a Tange disciple, published the Prefabricated Apartment House. In it, he joined the idea of modular service units for kitchen, toilets and nursery units with pre-cast concrete construction. He subscribed the concept of servant and served spaces, and defended the idea of the building forms to be as precisely organized as the space rocket. In 1969, he would write his Capsule Declaration, paying homage to cyborg architecture and the era of human mobility and electronics. The concept of capsule living embeds an idea of spatial optimization to the most intricate detail. It is also embedded in the idea of an ultimate placenessness, where the lifestyles of individuals travel freely in the space of the metropolis, as they freely inhabit a technotronic society. The concept would be in the origin of some of his most remarkable creations, with the Capsule House inside the thematic pavilion of Expo’70, in Osaka, the Takara Beautillion pavilion, and most famously, in the Nakagin Capsule Tower, in 1972198.

69 In a different context, the Archigram group also delivered technocratic idealizations in their utopian imagery. Visual references for projects such as Plug-in City (1964), The Walking City (1964), or Instant City (1968), span among comics, pop-art, popular sci-fi, technology of oil refineries or of space-age capsules, in post-apocalyptic or dystopian renderings. It is also about an architectural apocalypse, as it conceptually consisted in a deliberate assault on architectural conventions, invading its seriousness with popular art, all of which pinpointed by a great deal of irony and provocative spirit. There is, on the one hand, a concern in addressing urbanism, and on the other, the design and conception of individual buildings, where the injection of new subjectivity in the design and conception of architecture was simultaneously linked with an engagement with the urban frame. The idea is too remarkably visible in Constant Nieuwenhuys’ architectural-artistic proposals, where the envisioned structures are as if floating in space, suspended, extendable, anarchical, limitless. The New Babylon (1956- 1974), is in this sense envisioning a utopian anti-capitalist city, thought of as a flexible system in permanent change, made to provide pleasure, creativity, the situationist detournement and the human encounter. As it expands, it forms a cluster morphology, freely adapting to the ground conditions. In detail, the cities of the New Babylon are articulated sectors; each a macrostructure composed of mi- crostructures where housing and public space may merge199. Above all, through Archigram or Constant’s proposals, it can be witnessed an immanent promise of imagining alternatives, and effectively placing them at a communicational level which benefits its larger understanding in a wider, non-expert audience. Without such mesmerizing and promise of imagination, it is hard for architecture to live up to a liberating status that has potential to touch society, to engage people. However, that is also a dimension of a fantasy of disenchantment, where: “Architecture is probably a hoax, a fantasy world brought about through a desire to locate, absorb and integrate into an overall obsession a self-interpretation of the everyday world around us”, as Warren Chalk wrote in an open letter to David Greene in 1966200. The Smithson’s as found, as Van Eyck’s Kasbah’s, had been such a self-interpretation, where in its stride architecture ends up accumulating de-contextualized imagery. In a post-apocalyptic worldless world, there will be no room for architecture to be seen, as we will all be in a elsewhere spaceship and can only look outside, from within, to the greater architecture of nature. From all these examples, in which it can be recognized at least an implicit structuralist affiliation, we can observe recurrent concepts, such as: repeated use of identical elements; modularity of structures, elements, or relations; use of self-generative or rule-based mechanics; establishment of different hierarchical modes (e.g. structure and infill); causality between individual project and the city and vice versa. Many of these characteristics could be regarded from a mechanistic—algorithmic—point of view. Yet, given the broader range of structuralism, only a simplistic approach could endure such a perspective in exclusivity. Nonetheless, the temptation to place its interpretation from a mechanistic

standpoint has endured in architectural circles. That figures a limited insight to structuralism, but nevertheless sets practical prospects towards a different understanding of the relations between architecture and optimized construction methods, which have more recently been revived with a new attention given the variability enabled by the technological evolution. Herman Hertzberger provided a eloquent insight on this dispute, writing: “Everything in architecture, good or bad, in which the constructive aspect occupies a visually prominent position, and which has to do with repetition of prefabricated components (whether of concrete or of some other material), with grids or frames, rigid or shaky or both – it is all labelled structuralism. The original and by no means empty meaning of structure and structuralism indeed appears to have been submerged by loads of architectural jargon”201. On a contrasting argumentation, if taking structuralism literally to design, every form is ultimately structuralist. That inevitably results in voiding the pertinence of making any distinction between structuralism and other ways of approaching de- sign202. As an -ism, structuralism is indelibly historically traceable, as many of the examples we have referred can portray. However, it embodies a much deeper potential, not only in binding a discursiveness of vernacular or natural with objectifying conceptions, but also in the framework it provides towards an engagement of alterity conceptions in architectural production.

2.4 Alterity in architectural production

Finally completing a new building seems such a glorious culmination. But it is an illusion… A building is not something you finish, a building is something you start. —Stewart Brand in How Buildings Learn, What Happens After They are Built

Artists talk a lot about freedom. So, recalling the expression ‘free as a bird’, Morton Feldman went to a park one day and spent some time watching our feathered friends. When he came back, he said: ‘You know? They’re not free: they’re fighting over bits of food’. —John Cage

Freedom is amorphous. —Salvador Dali

Don’t ask for a rainbow, fetch it. —Aldo Van Eyck

As free actors in space, we are nonetheless intrinsically constrained by the underlying context through which we are born and bred. As a semiotic point of departure, this notion is unquestionable. However, its radicalization has also been criticized. The extremes, which philosophically can be put in dialectics such as existentialism and structuralism, empiricism and rationalism, or freedom and constraint, can unobtrusively be regarded as opposed. In existentialism, man’s ego (its individuality) faces an Other (i.e. a community, a nation, a world, and so on). In structuralism, the ego is seen as unavoidably located within a structure, implicitly conditioned by an Other. However, on the one hand, facts cannot be observed as facts alone, as observation implies a structure from which observation takes place. Conversely, structure cannot be reasoned by structure alone, as to reason we first need to observe facts to place them comparatively—e.g. without experiencing the sky, clouds never could be deduced from nothing. In this perspective, pure reason or logic are tautological, they cannot create new knowledge in themselves. They can only be based in previous axioms made from previous observations, thus ultimately stressing an ontological quest. On the other hand, pure sensorial input would be anarchic, fragmented, and not recordable, as if spray-painting a wall which is not there203. Architectural production implies some sort of control procedure. However, there are more obvious or subtle ways to exert it towards the experiential level of a user or observer. An application of the semiotic notions of language and speech, could imply a formulation of build objects open to free

interpretation, or that somewhat could be freely appropriated by the user. However, unlike it can be in the humanities, in architectural production it will hardly suffice to theorize or speculate. In principle, something is to be brought about materially, in a graspable form. On the one hand, this indicates that perhaps architecture should be regarded with a special interest from the viewpoint of other areas of knowledge. Conversely, this is also signal of the problems which theorization faces when confronted with a praxis. In a physical world, the structural Homo Significans is frequently engulfed by the constructive, legal or economic impositions limiting architects’ or users’ freedom. Regarded as a counterpart of control, freedom can be described as unconcealed, unlimited release. Unlike freedom’s release, spatial formulation is ordered, targeted, even if it is of an emotional order, or an order that is impossible to define. Such as indicated by the trap of language evidenced by structural linguistics, freedom is too virtual, not attainable, intrinsically subjected to a sort of control, as a rainbow that can be seen but not fetched. Freedom is thus subjected to a (in)visible structure, so it is not independent. It takes no account of things, is anti-social, anti-authoritarian, anti-structure, or conflictual, and ultimately is in itself constrained. In that sense, there is no such thing as freedom of choice, as, by choosing, freedom is paradoxically diminished. Where everything is possible, there is no reference, no need, there is just an isotropic, non-referential void. In this sense, freedom is amorphous, thus non-architectural. The issue is eloquently illustrated by the paradox of choice, where is stated that, psychologically, the more autonomy and freedom of choice, the more difficult is for a choice to be made, as aspects such as chooser’s anxiety increase, to the point of paralyzing decision: more is less, too much paralyzes204. Space-time creates a demand, which is manifested in a perceived form, and it is this formalized space-time that makes freedom understandable. Within the multilayered construction business, architectural decision-making is often overwhelmed by upstream decision levels. This makes it difficult to escape a certain functionalist perspective, which typically favors, say, a certain financial accountability, which in turn may not be very consistent with user’s spatial freedom: freedom is always conditional. Agreeing with the Marxist notion that economy has the primacy over political or social life, perhaps the main purpose of a functionalist perspective is to determine which couples with the requirements of predictability. This means to envisage what can be the expected effects of certain options taken during the course of the design process. On another level, determinacy can be a cause of detachment of the building with its user. People need to be identified with the spaces they inhabit205, and that seems to be the best way for buildings to endure, as people will more likely be caring for what they value and cherish, than for any sort of overshadowing, controlling force206. Following the language and speech distinction, a participatory or co-determined architecture could be regarded through a perspective where, if language is the design, speech is given to the occupants. As Hertzberger wrote: “The relation between a collective given and individual interpretation as it exists between form

and usage as well as the experience thereof may be compared to the relation between language and speech”207. Archi- tecture or urban planning can be regarded as the result of an interpretation from the architect of both a material and an immaterial field that are read from a collective language sphere. In a way, the speech can too be seen as the unfolding integration of these elements, where built and social structures are met [complement with: Annex, I.10 Enacting freedom in Herman Hertzberger’s Central Beheer]. That is an interpretation of archetypal social behaviors, but also something that we can allegori- cally ascribe to an endless Musée Imaginaire—an imaginary collection of images existing in the memory, as originally described by André Malraux208. Following the metaphor, architecture harvests its shapes from such an imaginary museum, translating it in the design, where thus speech is given to the architect. This Musée Imaginaire also recalls two essential parameters of architectural freedom: the architect designing from his own background, his personal museum; and the freedom of the user, also with a museum of his own. In each, control and freedom occur at different levels, with the architect exerting his spatial freedom under, e.g., economic or regulatory constraints, the user exerting his spatial freedom under, e.g., the constraint of the built form he inhabits, and both constrained by their individual traces and an underlying social bias. Buildings are thus where two human organizations meet, the intense group within, and the larger, slower, more powerful community outside. There is the experiencing human being, but there is also the frame of control—e.g. state, legislation, and so forth. A building can even be our own house, but, in many cases, we cannot do what we want with it— economic, social or environmental constraints limit options; regulation mechanisms have a word on what can be built, or on aspects of how a house looks like, and so forth. In bringing form to a material sphere, the architect’s freedom and responsibility is never fully elim- inated, since in similar conditions, different architects most likely produce different designs. In this sense, the architectural solution is personal/subjective. With or without awareness, there is always a constraint of some sort when transferring though to the built environment, which will be manifested in the use of some sort of intermediary, control mechanism—e.g. urban regulations to communicate maximum building height allowed, graphic representation to communicate building’s dimensions to contractor, and so on. Thereby, the architect’s task occurs in a limbo, where the client’s expectations must be met, while his own experience may in cases point to a different direction, or regulations yet another. That is, the subjective constraints of the individual sphere of the architect face the subjective constraints of the individual sphere of the client, to which it must be added the collective constraints, and so forth. Yet, because delivering form is a requirement, for the architect, the path through this threshold must be traversed to bring up the artifact to life, and that implies choices, funneling possibilities, going to one side while discarding other. Anyhow, buildings seem to have a life of their own, and therefore a certain built form is not final, but a becoming—as Stewart Brand (b.1938) writes, “a building is never really finished”209. Implicitly or

74 explicitly, to alienate or attract human participation, involve or not the user in the design process, purposefully specify or not parts of the design, leaving a greater or lesser degree of appropriation to the user’s criteria, can be discouraged or stimulated (or perhaps just ignored) by the architect. This kind of perspective of control can also be set for a larger urban or territorial level and ultimately can be regarded as an ideological matter. For instance, the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism of the University of São Paulo (1969), by Vilanova Artigas (b.1915-d.1985), is a remarkable example of ideology taken to an extreme, where freedom and equality are determining guiding principles. The spaces are wide open, seemingly without hierarchy. That is further stressed by its flow in half levels, connected soft and wide ramps, which give a sense of a single plan level. Nonetheless, there is an imminent order. Spatially such order is primarily given by the huge public atrium, a central void that physically and visually bonds the diverse spaces of the building, and from where the different levels and their connections can be perceived. This order is further stressed by the building envelope, particularly its roofing, which dominates the internal space, and by the precise rhythm of its solid columns that enable [and contrast with] the lightness of the roof, which is stressed by its geometrically precise skylight pattern. The order of the building is what enables its freedom; the central communal space represents a spatial order, which nonetheless is intended from a purpose of freedom. The fact that the building was though without entrance doors further stresses the ideology of a democratic, communal space, which finds its greater expressions in an idea of fluidity and certain programmatic open- endedness, through wide spaces and free flow communication. Anyhow, although beloved, the building is also criticized by its users, since its open-endedness can sometimes be chaotic. In a way, its polyvalence simply lacks order, and that simply does not always comes in handy: its ideology (i.e. freedom) is also its imprisonment. The architectural production is indeed an imperfect equation. Social life is full of uncertainties and constraints. As Marx disclosed, control is inextricably bonded to [social] conflict. Likewise, any sort of user participation in an architectural design will inevitably origin conflict. Between the architect and the user, there is a potential conflict of a communicational or cultural nature. Although still revisited, the qualities and faults of Modernist control strategies have become clearer with time in respect to the alienation of human participation, invariably favoring other aspects. In any case, critique may be unfair to many of the modernist architects, as, in many ways, aspects of their designs were out of their control. For instance, architects in the postwar were in a large pressure to meet the huge demands for social housing, and quality had to make way for quantity. In everyday practice, architects are pressured to deliver in some way, and conditions are often far from ideal. It is not an easy task to focus in delivering quality to the design, as stuff as bureaucratic tasks and the like accumulate, limiting the architect’s ability to devise responses. In another perspective, often there seems to be a lack of communication between architectural professionals and other actors involved in the building’s construction or building’s maintenance throughout its life span.

75 Anyhow, most of the modernist architectural archetypes were, in brief, fundamentally based in an alienating conception, where tight control mechanisms mostly impede user participation, or in the least result in less inviting forms210. Opposed to such a deterministic conception several voices aroused in praise of cross-cultural approaches towards non- or less-restrictive principles211. In the historically developed city, the palimpsest of built layers is rendered as result of open forms and a varied and stable network of relationships within the entire system occurring through the special sociability of the street. In it, there is seemingly no imposition, as control is socially implied. As it appears to an observer in the present, the network of streets, its relation of building heights with width of streets, it all seems to be a balanced game of economy, materials, techniques, social accepted values of privacy, security, and so forth. In our modern cities, control and the role of authorities are a major influence on the design and use of built environments. On the one hand, authorities are important to assure the existence and coherence of the urban infrastructure. On the other hand, their control should not extend so far that people lose any sort of influence212. The major problems seem to appear when control is liberated to voracious speculation. Ultimately, the users will inevitably be constrained by their ability to afford certain spaces, which often leaves them hostages of the profit- engaged mechanisms, with few or simply no chance of influence. On the long run, between the control levels of public policies and their emanating regulations, building entrepreneurship, design, and using, the outcome is not always profitable to the built environment. In such a chain, the architect and the user are typically the least controlling in the entire process. Nonetheless, influence can be exerted from these, as it has been attempted in Jean Nouvel’s Nemausus I state-financed social housing, built in 1986 in Nimes, France, where an ingenious method was devised to overcome dwelling’s spatial limitations implied by regulations [complement with: Annex, I.11 Alterity beyond Control through Jean Nouvel’s Nemausus I]. Inevitably, any kind of speculative design has probably a greater potential of mismatch between the design intentions and the building’s normal use. Anyhow, most buildings are unavoidably speculative, and no architecture can suit all tastes. Architecture requires options to be taken, an order to be established, although not necessarily a totalitarian control. Whatever the order may be, that necessarily ends up pleasing some more than other. As in the sentence attributed to Abraham Lincoln, “You can please some of the people all of the time, and you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”. There are thus no definitive answers on how to combine control and user freedom in architectural production. Moreover, the expressed intentions and the practice often lead to contradictory statements. When Mies van der Rohe reduced a building to an ideal ‘fast nichts’ [“almost nothing”], as in the Farnsworth house, we could apparently understand it as an embodiment of a non-interference of the architect on the lives of the users. Nothing could be further from the facts213. With Mies’ nothingness what was instead suggested, was a maximum opportunity for freedom of expression, but only and

only if as not altering what the architect envisions. Such idealized nichts [“nothingness”] turns out to be a mirage of freedom which only some can afford, and few can cope with—a total, permanent, imposed, perfect, irrefutable, controlled, ideal, personal (the architect’s view), non-universal freedom214. The Fransworth house is immaterial matter, metamorphosed in the prestidigitator hands. It indulges [a simulated] freedom, which lives and breathes in a utopian world, where the tiniest contamination will have devastating effects: change is ruin. It is a highly sophisticated, final language with no admissible speech. Edith Farnsworth, the client which had endorsed Mies to entirely fulfill his architectural beliefs into the design, would later attack Mies’ famous axiom: “Less is not more”, she wrote, “It is simply less!”215 (but then, apparently there were also personal issues involved). The more radical functionalist approaches reduced space design to a machine engaged with progress, with little or no concern for man’s less quantifiable needs. The subject is recurrent since, with different sorts of approaches. One can be the putting into perspective the obsessive nature of an immaculate functional order by an appeal to flexibility. Another can be to regard research within the cultural context of an activity to be applications from which to reinterpret, rework and exploit the functional program216. In one, the technical answer, where the built spatial hardware is hard-wired towards user participation. In the other, the open-space with no predetermined meaning correspondence, available for free interpretation, where the space is materially released from its functional purpose, placing control not in a physically built form, but in implied regulatory design mechanisms which endure a potential of adaptability. The first can archetypally be ascribed to the type of approach endured in Gerrit Rietveld’s Schröder House (1919), and can be contemporarily noted in the transformable apartment theme, using transformable, multi-purposed furniture and [high]-tech apparatus in order to optimize space through flexibility of use. The latter finds an eloquent archetype in Le Cor- busier’s conceptual Dom-ino (1915). The formalization of both the technical, and the open types, is intrinsically related on the structural and infrastructural design philosophy. Rietveld’s Schröder House, although built to a specific client, also renders a highly conceptual approach. Each activity in the house requires a choice. On each situation, the user can decide what the intended house configuration is. Such is enabled by a series of built-in sliding partitions. In the center of the living level, there is a fixed core with services and the stairs. The bedroom level is too following a principle of embedded sliding doors. There are numerous different spatial combinations hard-wired in the building. The concept got to concretization because the client keenly defended such concepts. Nevertheless, throughout its history, the concept would reveal its faults. What was probably playful in the beginning, would eventually reveal hard or unnecessary. The effort to constantly open or close the sliding doors ultimately led the clients to keep the same spatial configuration all the time, that is, to turn permanent their flexibility options217.

A broad idea of user participation was notoriously implied in Le Corbusier’s Plan of Obus in Algiers (1928-1931), based on an infinite linear curved block bounded to the structure of the motorway, where the possibility of participation by its inhabitants is left open. The earlier conceptual Maison Dom-Ino (1914-15) had already denoted an open-endedness in its free plan and façade, but nonetheless it had no formalization, conveying an idea of freedom through its bondless indeterminacy. The design is truly a proto-architectural concept, a framework, completely independent of the floor plans of the house: a concrete skeleton with three slabs, six pillars and a staircase, embedded in the idea of mass production and allowing a great deal of layout and façade variability. It is also the prototypical image of many designs later developed by Le Corbusier to address the housing problem—namely the Maison Citrohan (1920), the Immeubles-Villas (1922), the Pessac (1925), or the Villa Savoye (1931)—but also archetype of vacant, adaptable forms. The concept foresaw a bearing structure, which could be used as a base to take decisions about the plan divisions and windows location and size in a later stage of the design or even of the construction, and thus can be interpreted as an open-ended design, allowing user freedom. Fundamentally, it is foremost a concept, not too much compromised with a final form, and that may well be what made it prevail. In common, the types depicted by Schröder or Dom-Ino houses ascribe to the need to make the spaces we inhabit our own, instilled with freedom purposes under a more or less explicit sphere of control. They convey a desire for a sense of permanence, for stability, for keeping a feel of shelter and reference to call a place our home. In this sense, Rietveld’s concept-made-house may had worked fine if the house was not to be assigned to a single family, but instead temporarily occupied by different families over time. Nonetheless, the open-ended principles were unthinkable in the post-war mass housing: more freedom meaning more technical apparatus (Schröder) or more space availability (Dom-Ino), and in both more is money. From the earlier modernist optimization studies, post-war construction urgency and so forth, compartmentalization of the building process through different, industrially-driven, construction components made more sense than ever, and control towards built-form could be more accurate than ever. With it, it has risen a preliminary methodological distinction between what can be called the servant and served spaces, a terminology which fundamentally distinguished those spaces with more variety and/or density of infrastructure terminals, such as kitchens or toilets, from those with less, such as bedrooms and living rooms. In brief, the servant would stand for a lesser potential of transformation, whereas the served for seemingly more freedom of space. Modernism had already provided the notion of the free plan and/or free façade. Alongside, it was distinguished a structural core of columns, beams or slabs, from a remaining free floor and façade space. With the introduction of discrete levels, the services were added to the distinction. To the structural core would be added a second, infrastructural core, the services.

Buckminster Fuller’s prefabricated bathroom (1938) stood as an extreme concretization of such conception, adding both concepts of product rationalization and ergonomics towards the determination of its shape, and calculated exactly in agreement with the space that is assumedly necessary for it to be transported to site with ease. In the Salk Institute, in La Jolla, California (1959-1965), Louis Kahn implicitly distinguished servant and served spaces, with the program reflecting the requirements as well as mirroring the deepest wills of people for freedom and security. In the project, the complex is divided in three parts, each related with an aspect of the research institute, with a publicly accessible meeting center, semi-public research laboratories and a private dwelling center. In the research building, the servant spaces are articulately subordinated to the served laboratory area. The spatial concept is integrated with the structure, which enables a span that leaves the entire floor area free for any type of posteriorly intended subdivision. Between a buildings’ useful life and the need to typify human activities lies a central conflict. In a shorter or longer run, once a part of a city or a building is completed, it will invariably be occupied differently than what was initially suggested. Such unpredictability, has led some theoretical and/or design approaches to claim for a greater flexibility in use, calling for ease of adaptability or to design with polyvalence in mind. Different goals may be at stake, where generally is accepted the idea that the material elements of construction should not undermine eventual future changes in the building’s use. A related idea has to do with the future prospect of totally or partially recycling built structures, discretely separating them in hierarchies conducted by life-span expectancy. The quest for flexibility can hence lead to different approaches. Some, by setting some material decisions to latter stages of the design process (or leaving them open). Others, by applying standardized, hence potentially more easily replaceable building elements. Others even, by distinguishing between primary and secondary elements, or between those that are to be permanent and those more easily replaceable. These approaches are not exclusive and may be found used simultaneously218. Moreover, as with the greater or lesser availability of space, the design brief will inevitably affect how freedom-enacting intentions may be transposed.

3 TAXONOMIC LANDSCAPES: (RE)MAPPING ARCHITECTURE’S STRUCTURES

Der Römische Brunnen

Auf steigt der Strahl, und fallend gießt Er voll der Marmorschale Rund, Die, sich verschleiernd, überfließt In einer zweiten Schale Grund; Die zweite gibt, sie wird zu reich, III Der dritten wallend ihre Flut, Und jede nimmt und gibt zugleich Und strömt und ruht.

[“Roman Fountain

The jet ascends and, falling, fills The rounded marble basin up, Which shrouds itself before it spills Into a second basin’s cup; Growing too full, the second runs Its surging billows to the next, And all three give and get at once, And run and rest.”]

—Conrad Ferdinand Meyer, translated by A.Z. Foreman

3.1 A general notion of systems

Cognitive psychology indicates there is a human tendency from which seemingly complex operations, of which there is no prior knowledge of, are understood from what are thought to be their simpler terms, and by which difficult operations are solved by breaking them into smaller, easier to grasp, parts219. This reductionist notion also implies some sort of reference from where things are to be compared and understood, and that essentially raises the need of having some kind of taxonomy to relate the otherwise diffuse fragments. Anyhow, a reminder should be present to what has been said by the Gestalt psychologist Kurt Koffka, “the whole is other than the sum of its parts”220, implying that when the human mind forms a percept (or gestalt), that the whole is something other, or different, than what appears to be grasped from what are hence its parts. To this, we can add the Royal Society’s motto, nullius in verba (Latin for “on the word of no one” or “take nobody’s word for it”), which incites the breaking of boundaries and ever questioning. With an implied methodological call for science, the motto suggests that boundaries are there to be broke, but also that, recursively, when breaking them, there are new boundaries coming to life before us. As subscribed under a structuralist viewpoint, it is from the (sub)conscious structures that we are able to give a foundation, question and develop knowledge, thus going beyond existing boundaries. In Myth and Meaning (1979), Lévi-Strauss expressed his understanding that “science has only two ways of proceeding: it is either reductionist or structuralist… And when we are confronted with phenomena too complex to be reduced to phenomena of a lower order, then we can only approach them by looking to their relations, that is, by trying to understand what kind of original system they make up”221. Regardless the approach, it stands out that some degree of simplification must be attained to understand seemingly more or less complex phenomena. Moreover, there is also a relational sphere, referring not only to isolated elements, but also how to rationalize their affiliation, implying a systematicity. The latter is thus key towards the production of knowledge, in the unfolding processes of building and structuring signification. It is what essentially enables a communicational platform, enabling ideas to be recognized, differentiated, and understood, affecting aspects such as language, prediction, inference, decision-making and all kinds of environmental interaction, and thus involving processes of choice. As structuralism implies, every discipline is supported in a particular language, defining its terms and establishing common grounds, and without a communication platform, no discipline or knowledge of any kind can be developed. The taxonomic mechanisms of a systematicity enable it. Thereby, a common ground between the notions of structure and system can be established222. Subscribing a Kantian architectonic notion, which can roughly be acknowledged as equivalent to a systematicity, the ways by which architecture is brought into being can be regarded as embedded of an organizational nature, where both a nounomenal (or mental) and a material (or executive) spheres meet. For instance, on the dialectic of design/construction, through mental/prospective notions such as

82 design system or compositional system, or executive notions such as constructive system, systems construction223, or prefabricated systems224. Transposing a systems’ vocabulary to architecture, questions such as what is a system? or what characterizes system? can be translated into something such as what is a building? or what characterizes a building?, and so on. Even leaving philosophical interpretations of these questions aside, such questions are anyhow vague on their own, and would have to be further specified. In this case, the formulation implies an equivalence of system with building, hence where building is not an object of analysis in itself, but symbolically a system-object insofar as it is understood of being constituted of diverse parts. Furthermore, in answering to what is a building?, in the least it would have to be understood what can be meant with building, or what it symbolizes. That is, if it is being addressed a projective-constructive reality (which in itself can be split in to additional streams of analysis), or if it is also being addressed a perspective such as of architecture’s functional program, building maintenance, or an experiential level of the use of space, and so forth. The taxonomies thus established for any such analytical process are intrinsically of a limited scope, and have to be regarded insofar as a transitory and inherently symbolic formulation. That is, there is an underlying practicality in establishing these kinds of distinctions, which can serve methodological and/or communicational purposes. For methodological purposes, a distinction between a theoretical and an empirical system can be established225. The first can be said of being of an in-out type, traveling from a mind-set (a mental, nounomenal dimension of concepts, propositions, or suppositions) towards the world (a material dimension of real or imaginary beings, objects, or things), via empirical reference and logical integration. The second can be said of being of an out-in type, moving from a set of phenomena to theory. Laszlo and Krippner described the concept of system as serving “to identify those manifestations of natural phenomena and process that satisfy certain general conditions. In the broadest conception, the term connotes a complex of interacting components together with the relationships among them that permit the identification of a boundary-maintaining entity or process”226. A system can thus be regarded as a boundary condition, or directional reference—e.g. in-out or out-in—between two states acknowledged as being different. Furthermore, the establishment of a boundary condition implies a formalization through a symbolic device—i.e. setting a frame of reference of a reality (symbol) through a certain form (e.g. material, verbal, visual, and so forth), i.e. clarifying a scope. Deepening the definition base, a system can formally be described as a frame acknowledging a set of two or more elements, where each element has an effect on the whole, each element is affected by at least another, and all its infra-groups or supra-groups have the first two properties227. Additionally, we can generally speak of four main characteristics of a system. One is things, that is, the objects, parts, elements, variables, or other (sub)systems within it, which may be physical, abstract or both, depending on the nature of the system and the intentionality of its use. A second is attributes, that is, its qualities or properties and its things. A third is relations, that is, the internal relationships among its things. A

forth is environment, that is, the surrounding, or medium where it exists. From here, a broad definition of system can be put as a set of things that affect one another within an environment and form a larger pattern that is different from any of the parts228. Put in more visual terms, a system can be regarded as more of a pattern than of a thing in itself. Although not entirely accurate, a way of illustrating it would be through an analogy of moving in and out a visual representation of a Mandelbrot fractal set, in the sense that the fractal depicts interrelated elements, whose appearance is differently rendered in each moment or scale of observation, regardless their bonds, but nonetheless retain an invariance relating them. That is, more than a stagnant entity, the acknowledgment of a system serves a methodological purpose, but can only acquire significance when dynamically set alongside other so-called systems, that is, their value resides in their symbolic power as both referential (rational) and significant (semiotic) device. From the diverse approaches that can be observed in the literature describing systems, stating aspects such as wholeness and interdependence, hierarchy, inputs and outputs, and so forth229, perhaps the most comprehensive is the one emanating from the knowledge of the second law of thermodynamics. From there, it is suggested the exchange capabilities of a system, studying thermodynamic systems in terms of their kinds of boundaries and of transfers, addressing notions such as openness or closeness, external or internal, dynamic or adynamic, permeable or impermeable, and so forth, which can only be observed from the establishment of a boundary condition. Anyhow, distinctions such as open/closed are in last instance purely methodological (even in thermodynamics)230, given the implied relativism of systems231. The above terminology stands for the thermodynamics approach, but analogous terms can be used to concepts such as exchanging information or currency, or also to describe nature’s eco-systems, and so forth232. For instance, in architecture, a notion such as closeness can in spatial terms somewhat convey the idea of more of a controlled environment, or objectual sense, and conversely, openness may imply interaction, or the ability to cope with change233. From what has been said, in brief, a system can be considered as a boundary condition, representation, or classification, of a universe of elements. In broad terms, we could synthesize it in a set of the kind S={t, a, r, e}, with ‘S’ standing for system; ‘t’ for things, ‘a’ for attributes; ‘r’ for relations; and ‘e’ for environment234. In higher or lower ranks, each element in this formulation could be analyzed as an analogous system per se, meaning potentially obtaining an infinite set of systems from a given finite system—hence an open system(aticity). By opposition, it can be said that a closed system is one where is required a formal consideration onto where the range of analysis is limited, thus defining the scope of the system, enclosing it. Anyhow, for practical purposes, most systems so-considered are regarded from a closed perspective. To illustrate such a systems’ schematics in an architectural context, the system say constructive component of a building—e.g. steel truss—can be observed from the perspective of its diverse elements. Its things,

i.e. the elements that make up the component—e.g. steel profiles, screws, bolts, welds, paint. Its attributes, i.e. the characteristics of the elements considered individually or their function in the whole component—e.g. paint can have both a protective and an aesthetic function, and so forth. Its relations, i.e. again considered in each of the individual elements or in the overall component—e.g. the relation between a steel profile and a screw, or how the steel truss will connect to its support, what visual effect will it produce. Finally, its environment, i.e. the supra or infra systems with which will it be a part of or contain—e.g. the building is the environment of the steel truss, but also a portico formed by the truss and its supporting columns can be considered as its environment, and so forth. Additionally, a steel-truss like the one described in our example, can be considered as a closed system from e.g. a spatial use perspective, but can also be considered as an open system from the perspective of e.g. its maintenance (e.g. painting to protect it from corrosion), and so forth. From here, it is also clear that besides its intrinsic formality, that an underlying intentionality is required to make a knowledgeable or an operative sense of a system—or, as Marchal has written, “and, of course, what we end up looking for will depend on the kinds of systems that we have found it interesting to identify”235. The mapping of a system is thus subjected to a set of purposes, scope, or on the resources available to proceed it, and so forth. Anyhow, some findings are just not readily possible to recognize or to assimilate, and thus frame onto a system of some sort, and some others may never will. Moreover, with the available knowledge at a certain moment, some realities are just too complex to be mapped onto a system, or their relevance too far from a certain core purpose for it to have any practical relevance in more immediate terms. Overall, given an inherently qualitative dimension, which we can relate with the very human condition—a dimension where the homo faber, following Hannah Arendt’s description236, meets the homo significans—it stands out that more than set towards strictly utilitarian purposes, systems are partial, rational means of a seemingly ever-unraveling human construct. As the physicist Richard Feynman eloquently implied, we just have to allow ourselves to be in some framework where we have to make faith in what others tell us, otherwise risking on perpetually asking why?. That is perhaps why our civilization has come up with specialization, laws, standards, certifications, and so forth237. Whatever the work one makes, we are inescapably engaged in a societal frame, which involves tradeoffs and a degree of trust—implicit or explicit, aware or unaware—in what other people say or make, and thus we purposefully have to allow ourselves the ignorance and a socially engaged belief for our work to attain a productive sense. Anyhow, that does not mean disregarding the nullius in verba motto, which puts forwards a sense of dissatisfaction, where perfection or accomplishment cannot but fugaciously be fulfilled. As primarily an act of human intellect over space- time, whatever that may be, architecture must deal with the natural imperfectness and evolution of human spirit, and that is valid both for how architecture is produced as for the ways it is experienced. Moreover, as some of the most intrepid modernist works have shown, good intentions delivered in

optimized fashion by brilliant architectural minds, although may be aesthetically (subjectively) appre- ciable and/or symbolically sharp, do not necessarily mean successful designs from other points of view—e.g. Brazilia. It is our belief that the reality of architecture is not that of the perfection of universal laws that have the potential of explaining everything such as in physics, yet to act in the imperfectness of the unfolding human life. In that sense, architecture can be regarded as much more about social engagement than about science, less of a method, more of an ongoing praxis, carrying its memes, and in any case an artificial [and imperfect] human construction. Maybe the old adage of the computer world is true: the perfect system is one with no users. Nonetheless, through a more or less explicit statement of a systematic order, with greater or lesser accomplishment or influence, several remarkable authors throughout history have attempted to establish architecture’s taxonomies, as is the case of the ancient Vitruvius, the Renaissance men such as Alberti or Serlio, or the more recent Modern’s such as de Quincy, Durand, Semper, Le Corbusier, Habraken or Frampton. Anyhow, regardless the approach and/or circumstances, the fact is that the efforts undertook by these and others apparently signal an ontological aspiration, that of giving architecture a discursive foundation where the archetypal stones or any dogmatic formulation cannot reach. A foundation amid the unraveling dynamic of the things of the world, for fugacious that may be.

3.2 Type and architecture

3.2.1 A KIN ORDER OF TYPE In architectural discourse, the broadly used notion of type is what probably more vividly has been synthesizing the semantics of what is a seemingly more general notion of system. Indeed, although both are prone to multiple interpretations, the contribution of a system’s understanding of phenomena finds several analogies to that of the type in architecture, with both concepts often mistaken, which, depending on the scope or approach, it is not necessarily incorrect. Our built environment is perceived through our sensory mechanisms and evaluated through our cultural background, via ideals, images, values, meanings, expectations, and so forth. What we experience is the outcome of many individual decisions of numerous people over time. The patterns arising from this environment are direct derivations of a society’s culture over space-time, expressing shared preferences238, and these can be classified in multiple ways. In architecture things can be labelled in terms related with form (e.g. a box-like house), space (e.g. a patio house), and so forth. Architects, or other actors involved in the building processes, or any observer of such processes, can also use terms related with things such as the market (e.g. describing a house by the number of rooms, as T0, T1, T2), the style (e.g. colonial house or neo-classicist house), the location (e.g. country house or beach house), and so on. These classifications can be more or less ques- tionable, and whereas some will be more prone to trends, others can have a deeper impact in the continuous process of analysis and production of the built environment. Modernly, in architectural thinking, particularly since the XVIIIth century, with the contributions of Quatremère de Quincy (b.1755-d.1849) or Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand (b.1760-d.1834), such classifications have frequently followed the terminology of type. Nonetheless, the notion of type had been around in architectural circles for quite some time, although with different connotations239. While seeking for the origins of the art of building, common traces can be found everywhere. For instance, creating a shelter from available materials, or devising a technology for it to provide the basic purpose of protection towards the weather conditions. As eloquently put from a vernacular perspective, as different materials are found, new uses are eventually enabled, old materials given different uses, or the knowledge to devise a different technology is adapted, and so forth, eventually evolving to a higher sophistication in materials, techniques, or processes240. Such can be regarded as an evolutionary view, and is one that has been broadly implied by several versions of the myth of the hut, as famously expounded in Laugier’s cabane, set on the path of a Vitruvian-humanist tradition. In such an evolutionary perspective, forms are bound to arise from a timeless iteration between the observation of the real and its course in imagination, thus changing and adapting throughout.

87 Sprouting from the mythical notion of the hut, early reference books, such as Vitruvius’s, or later, since the Renaissence, Alberti’s, Serlio’s or Palladio’s books were embedded in the spirit of type. In such a Vitruvian lineage, the notion of type was essentially related to a kin idea of form, that is, on a certain predominantly objectual way of envisaging architecture. The case would particularly gain visibility with Serlio’s, due to the groundbreaking illustrations accompanying the text, while contributing to a wider dissemination and audience awareness. The broad scope of the Vitruvian triad firmitas, venustas and utilitas, ascribes to a kin architectonic whole of an objectual, but too divine sense, since architecture is there regarded as a synthesis of these ideas in an undividable, perfect whole of interdependent parts materi- alized in a construction form. That has carried epistemological repercussions to these days. The Doric, Ionic or Corinthian orders, rediscovered in the Renaissance, added to that objectual sense an emphasis on a somewhat mixed conceptual/aesthetical purpose. Conceptually, in the Renaissance, the faraway classical history provided a supposed ontological validation, which could not be thoroughly verified, but also could not be refuted—indeed the mythical hut model is based on non- particularly confirmable, yet plausible suppositions. The Roman or Greek remains, added by numerous inputs, such as those of remarkable Renaissance artists and architects, enhanced an aesthetical dimension to that ontological harbor, thus resulting in a higher-architecture—corresponding to a high- culture241—that readily became a model mimicked throughout. Remarkably illustrating the underlying validation process, a few centuries later, a comparable ontological harbor would be used to build the monumental, classicist inspired Washington DC, assumed as a both an architectural model and idealized as a solid, stable cornerstone of a liberal society242, safe-haven of a national identity. The classical orders are derived from a mythical inspiration—the hut or the like—each following more or less rigid rules and each with its particular issues, as illustrated by the classical corner alignment conflict of the Doric. Since seemingly directly binding conceptual and aesthetical purposes, the classical orders fundamentally reinforce an objectual, kin sense to architecture’s episteme. Further- more, they essentially constitute in themselves the idea of system, following its own laws, which can additionally be used in buildings in conjunction with other orders. Yet it can also be seen as a type, that is, each order can be distinguished from the others for the use of certain kinds of constructive or aesthetical motives related with more or less clear symbolic purposes, and so forth. From here, it matters to attempt to clarify the distinction between system and type, noting that the modern notion of type in architecture would extend far beyond the notions that could be interpreted from the classical orders, which in many cases has nonetheless blurred the difference in terms.

3.2.2 AN ENLIGHTENED TYPE Etymologically, type derives from the Latin, typus, meaning figure, image, form, or kind. From the Greek, typos, it is associated with a blow, dent, impression, mark, effect of a blow; figure in relief,

image, statue; anything wrought of metal or stone; general form, character; outline, sketch, and so on. From the XVIIth and XIXth century onwards, it has been used to symbolize, and to project, to foresee. Since ancient times, the knowledge of anatomy and physiology had been divided into systems—e.g. cardiovascular system, endocrine system, and so on243—which meanwhile have grown in specificity and clarification. Carl Linnaeus, in his Systema Naturae (1735) and subsequent works, was the primary responsible for the ‘invention’ of modern taxonomy, or systema as he called it, by then dividing the natural world in three kingdoms, (animalia, vegetalia, mineralia), each of these into classes, (e.g. animalia into mammalia, aves, amphibia, pisces, insecta, vermes), and so forth. To these days, in biological terms, the notion of system follows a similar logic, regarded as a group of related (natural) objects or forces within a defined zone, an interdependent or regularly interacting group of items making a unified whole. In the same Systema Naturae and other works, Linnaeus also famously used the word type in the biological notion of type specimen244 in his groundbreaking taxonomic classifications of the natural world. In biology, a type specimen is an example that serves to anchor or centralize the defining features of that particular taxon—i.e. it is a preserved specimen designated as a permanent reference for a new species, new genus or some other taxon. These types are usually physical specimens that are kept in a museum or herbarium research collection, but failing that, an image of an individual of that taxon has often been designated as a type. Regarded immutably, type has thus the classificatory character of an encyclopedia—i.e. a referential source of knowledge made to withstand the times, much in the fashion of the Vitruvian triad or the Classical architectural orders. Anyhow, nature’s classifications have evolved ever since Linnaeus, accompanying the findings of science, although in some cases early classifications have generally stood the test of time. In any case, directly or indirectly, type has most likely entered the architectural vocabulary based on Linnaeus’ signification, not least, in our belief, because an important part of Linnaeus’ type specimen characterizations followed a morphological insight. From there, as a modern conception of methodological breadth, the discourse of type definitely entered the architectural lexicon with the early encyclopedic definitions of de Quatremère de Quincy, or the collections of types of Jean-Nicolas Durand. In the core of de Quincy’s conception laid the distinction between type and model. In it, whereas type was located in the domain of the ideal, the abstraction, the model was located in a rendered set, used for practical purposes, repeated as it was245. According to de Quincy, fundamentally we should not mistake the idea of type with the idea of model. Whereas he regarded the idea of type as the original reason of the thing, which can neither command nor furnish the motif or the means of an exact likeness, the idea of the model was regarded as a complete thing, or an instance of the type, which was bond to a formal resemblance. The concepts do resemble the early biological taxonomic definitions,

where model can somewhat be understood as specimen, and type as type specimen, although clearly following a free interpretation of their own, including some philosophical additions. Curiously, de Quincy’s type/model distinction do resembles the genotype/phenotype biological distinction, which would only be introduced in taxonomic terms in 1908 by Wilhelm Johannsen246. Anyhow, on de Quincy’s lineage, other distinctions have followed, as for instance the historically closer analogous distinction, proposed by Habraken, between system and pattern247, which, regardless the divergence in terminology, in any case stands for the establishment of some kind of order, or replicable methodology, but not necessarily in stagnant mechanistic terms. On the same epoch as de Quincy, the French architect Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand developed a classification method to address architectural issues. Durand’s approach was too tuned with an enlightened French post-Revolutionary spirit, which was additionally in line with the teaching philosophy of his Polytechnique school248, where efficiency and economy were regarded as fundamental operators in architectural design and construction. By composing designs through modules on a squared grid, each depicting a scaled dimension, elements could be ordered: spacing of columns, wall locations, axis, openings, and so forth. Such approach expressed a generative understanding of the concept of type, since it was not limited by the mimicking of instances (models), but allowed a free-flow within a recognizable order. Additionally, with Durand’s Recueil et parallèle des édifices de tout genre anciens et modernes (…), or Le Grand Durand as it also became known (1800), it was delivered the first extensive survey on major architectural monuments built since classical times, gathering a massive collection of examples. The book included plans of different buildings from different historical periods249, and it was imbued with a true encyclopedic spirit. To ease comparison, the buildings were systematically classified, grouped by building type, drawn to a common scale and stripped off any context whatsoever. Indeed, in it, only plans and elevations were presented, and that in itself underlies an intention to depict universal architectural characteristics, regardless their location, cultural or historical setting. In a sense, through it, man does not inhabit a qualitative space, yet a universal geometric space, a notion that follows and stresses its very zeitgeist: method is everything.

3.2.3 CHARACTERISTICS AND LIMITATIONS Our modern inheritance, allied to a practical communicational sense, makes us name the spaces of the house after their functions—the bedroom is where we sleep, the kitchen, where we cook, and so on. Although of utterly practical intentions, this explanation is insufficient, since the relation between a so-considered spatial sphere and the activities that take place within is more complex than what such a functionalist view conveys. The spatial sphere involves qualities that exceed a mere functional characterization, such as a particular system of settings and a context. For instance, sleeping may

happen in places other than the bedroom, cooking normally takes place in the kitchen but different lifestyles or cultures may require different ways of using it, thus defying a usual functional correspondence. The spatial sphere certainly involves a particular location, with a particular environmental quality, which varies according to our socio-cultural perspective and/or background250. Therefore, to identify types of space, there must be an awareness of its inherent relativity, as well as of what potentially will be happening within those spaces. Moreover, it must be understood how these spaces are positioned within the whole system of which they are part of—e.g., a room in an apartment or an apartment in a building, and so forth. Not least, there must be an awareness of the transitional space between public and private, the open and the reserved, the self and the social and cultural milieu, and so forth, which will inevitably be reflected in the qualities and shape of the architectural ensemble. Keeping that awareness in mind, anyhow, the concept of type can generally be defined as what is constant in terms of parts and relations among the innumerous different expressions, serving a dual purpose: making us share its particular values, and therefore a culture, while allowing us to express our individuality within that culture. Partly, it can be ascribed to a communicational need, that of transmitting ideas through recognizable concepts, or attempting to reach a wider audience. Yet, part is also necessarily related with a Platonic Ideal, that is, a projective perspective, where implicitly or explicitly, type can be regarded as a device in the creative process. From here, two distinct ways of observing the type can be noted, the type as Ideal, and the put in practice of the type, in a different context relatively to the original, mimicking and adapting—i.e. transforming from an abstract notion onto a sensible object in a different place. As an Ideal, the type is not immutable, yet subject to change, as the practical developments, or the variations it arises, are ought to question their very source of departure. In a way, it can be regarded as an essence, a soul, or as an internal form-structure, that unites the works based on a type. In this sense, between objects of the same type there is a principle of similarity given by the type. For instance, the graph theory illustrates a method for visually representing what may be read as an essence, or objects stripped off to their similarities, which can be regarded as an application of the concept of type. Nevertheless, since architecture results from a social construction, the similarities depicting what is the essence embedded in the concept of type, depend on the scope or viewpoint from where they are regarded. Moreover, some types are naturally more easily recognizable or communicable than others. As a comparative instrument, type has long been used to analyze and discuss a design or multiple designs, and with it contributing to build further ones. Notwithstanding, when truly designing, the architect is not exactly or strictly concerned with the classifying principles, yet most likely to make use of those principles that are already neurologically embedded (or in the eminence of being embedded) in his own body-mind into a practical devising purpose in the creative process. In any case, we can recognize diverse possibilities to approach a notion of type in architecture, for instance through

the notion of archetype, prototype, typology, style, format, or pattern, of which non-constructive or non- creative processes can also be included. Regardless the approach, or simply a divergence in terminology, type is most eloquently manifested in architecture by the architectural works themselves. For example, any seemingly coherent group of architectural works, like the Greek temples, the Romanesque churches, the Palladian villas, the Prairie houses of F. L. Wright, as well as cases of vernacular architecture such as the Berber Moroccan houses or the Kasbah’s, can be described as tangible manifestations of the notion of type251. Whether addressing spatial, physical, stylistic or other spheres, the notion of type intrinsically allows multiple interpretations, since type is implicitly an abstraction issue, and as so, its notion is more or less vague. Different buildings built in different locations, with different sizes and different programs may belong to the same type. That is the case when they share similar formal characteristics, similar kinds of details, similar colors, and so on. For instance, very different buildings painted in blue, can be said of belonging to the buildings type blue, although there are many different blues’. Indeed, methodologically type implies what can be described as an inner coherence, or more precisely, the sharing of at least one common element of similarity between two or more elements that hence form it—thus binary. In that sense, as in a language/speech distinction, an individual cannot form a type, although it may belong to the type individual. However, as in verbalizing the colors we see, given slight differences in hue or luminance, it is difficult to categorize certain entities in a single shelf as in many cases they are in an intermediate zone. For instance, we know that green is between blue and yellow, but bluish green or greenish blue are harder to differentiate, and we can only distinguish or describe them by comparison with others and, even then, the very limits of our perception mechanisms will disable a broader understanding. Types thus have a relative definition; they are partial, as it is always to some extent any generalization; and type is a generalization of a certain say lower level of things, in other words, a description of a limited (inferior) set of relations. Nonetheless, a type is also qualitative, and thus subjectivity can and will arise. Therefore, the scope and terminology of each as so-described type as to be set clear and its breadth acknowledged through its limited condition.

3.2.4 A RATIONALE OF TYPE In an attempt to clarify the terminology of type, Duarte252 confronted it with what he called module, which was not used in the exact same sense as de Quincy’s notion of model (although there are resem- blances) but more as a component of a type, hence in a constructive and somewhat mechanistic perspective. Following his reasoning, a simplified, but straightforward way to understand it is to portray such a module as a sub-type of a type, where a set of modules forms a type, and such type will be a module of a different type, and so forth. From here, it can be considered that there are different levels of modules and types, whose definition degree depends on the abstraction degree in use253. This idea is quite

remarkably illustrated in the educational short movie Powers of Ten developed by Charles and Ray Eames in 1968, where the Universe is portrayed in and out successive scales of 10, from the human scale on to the entire universe and back to human scale down to the most elementary particles. Thus, the notion of type can also be regarded like a photograph, a frame in the continuum within which a certain story is told. Anyhow, from this understanding, the bonds between the concepts of type and system are reinforced, with no great observable difference between both concepts. The categories branch or set theory in mathematics provides notions that can be brought for a methodological discussion of the type. It not only helps to clarify the terms, but also extends the rationale of type to a point that exceeds what the practical purposes of type can usually have in architecture, providing a comprehensive understanding of its mechanics. In brief, it states that to formulate categories (∴ types), it is essentially needed the objects (∴ modules) and the morphisms (∴ relations). Moreover, it postulates that more important than the objects, is their relations (here we opt for the terminology type, object, and relation). Without the relations, it is impossible for types to be recognized, therefore to exist254. Such as with the Russell’s barber paradox, I exist insofar as one other recognizes me, without the other I am not. As such, in a practical sense objects only make sense when confronted (related) with other objects. In a simplified analogy, in architecture this can be illustrated by things such as the constructive joint (i.e. the relational element of two or more constructive elements), the hall space (i.e. the relational space between two or more spaces), or the door (i.e. the threshold between two different spaces), and so forth. That is, on how different objects—physical, virtual, abstract, and so on—may be brought together, connected constructively and/or spatially, and so forth. In any of these examples, the definition of the relating element constrains the very elements, their ability to face gravity, to flow, the ability for the user to see, hide, sense, cross, isolate, avoid, confront, … to exist. Objects are thus independent entities that are going to be related within a sphere of a different hierarchical degree that we can call type. As in the structuralist language and speech distinction, if we consider the objects as letters of the western alphabet then, for example, English grammar could be their type. Another type for the exact same objects could also be Portuguese grammar, whereas Sanskrit grammar would be using different objects for also a different type, and so forth. Relations are the implicit invisible element that enables objects, and types along with objects, to interact and communicate—in a sense, music only exists in what is distinguished from silence, hence, methodologically, it can be regarded as a somewhat ordered relation between perceived vibration and non-vibration, or more generally between vibration x vs vibration y, and so forth. Following the same matrioska reasoning, ultimately relations can themselves be considered a type of object, and so forth. Finally, ontologically, relations have no tangible manifestation, they are strictly spatial, since they binomially accompany an object whose function is to relate other objects, and thus they have a pure methodological existence—

i.e. a standalone object is such in the extent that it relates with space-time, through which we observe it, object-subject ourselves in space-time. Since the idea of type is intrinsically linked with the idea of object, the types of a given scale can be seen as the objects of a following scale—for example, the types of buildings can be considered as objects of the urban fabric255. For instance, consider the object ‘room’ (where ‘room’ is the type in object-room) and the object ‘door’ (where ‘door’ is the type in object-door). Via a certain relation, from both these objects we can obtain the object ‘bedroom’ (where ‘bedroom’ is the type in object-bedroom). Via a different relation, the same object could be instead a ‘dining room’, and so forth. Although belonging to different types through some scopes, both English, Portuguese and Sanskrit can be said of belonging to the same type—i.e. the type language. It is as imagining a world inside another, the universe in a nutshell256. In architectural terms, types and objects can be understood from different scales or degrees of observation, and, in each, the type can be defined with a bigger or smaller specificity, as it will also be analyzed through different levels of relations. Therefore, there can be types of urban spaces as a residential plaza, types of housing as a detached house, types of space as a kitchen, types of construction as a wall, and so forth. Also, a house can be a detached house, can have a court that can be a central court, a central square court, and so on; the degree of specificity can be increased until which each house has to be considered individually. More, an element can be set as belonging to a certain type, until a microscopic or macroscopic version of it is so far detached from the original observation point, that even the very object that was used as a starting point is unrecognizable in such analysis set. Evidently, there are more or less obvious degrees of reasonability, usefulness, or practicality in the observation and classification of phenomena—the degree of specificity of analysis of the house can extend as far as addressing each house individually, but, extremely, eventually also on to each individual texture on its walls, molecular composition, and so forth. Anyhow, in architecture, the most useful notion of architectural type also seems to be the most abstract. That is, the one that does not rely on any rigid shape or any sort of physical attribute, but in the way spaces are related and the social behavior they suggest or imply. For instance, when referring the type office building, the type open space, or the type supermarket, the specific characteristics of these are not being mentioned. These can have all sorts of shapes and sizes, and be organized differently, yet by the implicit abstraction of the type we can easily have a closer sense of what we may be dealing with. That occurs because the architectural type is de facto no more than a socially engaging instrument, as it enables, or eases the transmission of what is said meant or done—where the limits are in imagination as well as in the linguistic ability to socially and/or culturally convey them. To the types, objects and relations may be assigned different nomenclatures. As we have seen, in algebra they can be called, respectively, categories, objects and morphisms. In a systems terminology, they can be described as things, attributes, relations, (and environment). In architectural terms, eventually these

too can be termed differently as long as serving their taxonomic purposes. Finally, it is worth noting that, from a mechanistic point of view, the similarity of the concept of type with the concept of system is notorious. Yet, from such a perspective, whereas systems can generally be synthetized in the set S={t,a,r,e}, the concept of type in architecture can somewhat be regarded as a simplified version of this. In it, things and their attributes can be condensed to a unified notion of object, and the environment— i.e. the place or topos in diverse architectural acceptions—as in Durand’s geometrical detachment, is released of the equation, or simply left to observe on a type of a different order of observation. Overall, such can bring a binary formalization to type, regardless eventual unfolding that may occur, where T={o,r}, with ‘o’ for object and ‘r’ for relation, which provides it an enhanced operative sense, simplifying its communication, and that furthermore aligns with the psychological reductive (binary) needs to formulate thinking. From here, we could say that type can be considered as a simplified system, yet the value of such synthetized expressions is merely indicative, relative, and not to be seen in stagnant terms, and their unfolding can go as far as imagination may lead. Indeed, these synthetic expressions are ultimately no more than speculative. Their value can only reside in their use for a particular taxonomic frame.

3.2.5 USING AND UNDERSTANDING TYPES To a certain extent, the idea that the unfolding of types can go as far as imagination may lead agrees with Durand’s approach, which inspired architects to attain rational solutions for different types of architectural forms. His notion of type can be regarded as a directory of forms not referring to any particular context or use, but open to all their potential content. It could be regarded as if a manual of validated practices and, thereby, a target for reproduction. Indeed, many examples would be copied, and, in that sense, following de Quincy’s rationale, the type was in many cases rendered model. Nonetheless, the approach entails a much more important notion, as to design under Durand’s method is a matter of knowing the types and their possible combinations and, through it, finding further types and combinations. In this perspective, with it, immutability—or monotony—is there only if intended or allowed to. Added to a reenactment of symbolic values that Modernism had somewhat neglected, that is too a quest in which theorists and developers have engaged from a certain reenactment of the speech of the type in the 1960s and 1970s onwards. The use of types is not a matter of originality (or lack of it), it is a condition imposed by the use of natural languages to describe phenomena. When using a type-like description we engage communication among the different intervenient. A common ground is formed. From a common base, the architect, facing specific problems, is engaged to devise a synthesis. In this sense, something is made by transformation of something that is familiar. When transforming a traditional type, decisions must be taken on what to keep and what to reject. Because the type mirrors common values, the choice

process is engaged in the values of society. Therefore, a choice process is ought to reflect those shared values and not merely arbitrary choices. The type is not necessarily to be mimicked as a model, but to offer a frame of reference for problem discussion and ways of transforming, call it replication, originality, construction, deconstruction, or whatever label we may put to it. Type implies an analysis of a certain reality, which thereby recorded, belongs to a past tense. In a world flooded by (apparent) new things, it can turn out positive to follow a strategy of continuity with the past, as implied with type, without neglecting what is of our times. To do it, the circumstances and practical needs are ought to be let added to the modern spatial tradition, or any other tradition for that matter, and enrich it rather than replace what is still valued, that is, acknowledging our memes, building up on their shoulders. The originality of the architect, Homo Significans, lies in the ways as he, as too a Homo Faber interacting and working with the available reality, finds to assure this continuity in a particular way. In this sense, continuity is unfolded transformation, evolution, enrichment; it is not being stuck to the past nor ignoring it, and certainly not sterile repetition. De Quincy’s and Durand’s types aroused in the context of the Enlightment, reflecting the developments in natural sciences. Their path would be followed by a lineage of authors ascribing to a rational perspective, such as Viollet-le-Duc’s exaltation of rationality based on his admiration for Greek architecture, or his enthusiasm for the Gothic, expressed on the methods or materials of the first house, or on the analysis of the methods of construction of the Gothic builders. In The Concept of Type in Architecture - An Inquiry into the Nature of Architectural Form (1995), Agudin sums up a large extent of the tradition of the type discourse in architecture. Apropos the evolution of the concept during the XXth century he refers that “In the transition from the nineteenth to the twentieth century, the psychology of form exerted a profound influence in art theory and history. About the same time, Le Corbusier came up with an interpretation of the origins of architecture that emphasized the mentalistic nature of the first architectural invention. For Le Corbusier the first house was a primitive thought, rather than a primitive construction. Finally, in this century, the field of cybernetics and computing has provided the framework within which notions like ‘design process’ emerged. Architects and theoreticians, like Alexander and Eisenman, rejected the idea that a design starts with a preconceived image or type. Instead, they proposed the consideration of design as a ‘patterned design process’, in which the initial image or type plays no significant role”257. With Le Corbusier, van Doesburg258 and other fellow moderns, in a way the form became pre- ceded by concept, that of the space-time created by the mind, thereby separating the direct correspondence from myth to architectural form—e.g. a column serves a spatial intention, not a formal or stylistic aprioristic predicate. Type thus becomes more of an instrument of the mind, articulating with geometrical and/or perceptual259 intentions (e.g. space or materiality) to deliver form, seemingly in- verting the logic of the hut, setting it in terms of process instead of in terms of form as the former had engaged on, and with known analogies of the industrial world also implied.

Imbued of a certain dissatisfaction by the fading of the symbolic qualities in the architectural form that Modernism had proceeded, in the 1960s and 1970s, the concept of type had a resurgence. To- gether with the concept of typology, in a somewhat Durand’s reminiscence, it aroused as a fundamental epistemological notion, attempting to relinquish analysis and synthesis, history and modernity, in the works of some prominent architectural theorists such as Carlo Aymonino, Aldo Rossi or Giorgio Grassi. Following the diverse theoretical trends, a considerable number of texts were published on type in architecture. Some developments, such as with Stiny’s shape grammars, have also implied it with algorithmic processes of design, where from the assumption that architecture can be reduced to simple geometric shapes, and an interpretation of a coherent body of works, rules are devised in order to mechanistically reproduce or augment the body of works that originally made up its type260. In this manner, forms are to be scientifically validated, and thereby enabled for mechanization throughout. However, even if apparently accomplished, it remains a subjective, interpretational side of the original, which may jeopardize the validity of the scientific-like process—an issue that has seemingly been overcome in Duarte’s Malagueira grammar261. Other authors, such as Christopher Alexander262, have attempted to overcome the type as a constraining (aprioristic) image source, engaging in a transformative, organic sphere. However, even in those cases, again precedence lays even in the most hidden places, there, available, for subjectively be interpreted, and once again challenging the type. The variety of approaches to the notion of type in architecture throughout history has been remarkable, which confirms the richness of the discussion, and the danger of rushing into any sort of grand conclusions. As Agudin writes, “Type, like Form, is eminently a philosophical question”263. The real question, we would add, is engaging in the endless journey of finding out what architecture is all about, putting aside a logic of accomplished finale, maintaining a sense of openness towards the world.

3.3 A discrete view of architectural production

“When you buy furniture, you tell yourself, that’s it. That’s the last sofa I’ll need. Whatever happens, that sofa problem is handled”. —Ed Norton’s character’s lament in the movie Fight Club (1999) after his condo gets blown up

Through the Vitruvian triad of utilitas (use, ergonomy, function, space), firmitas (solidity, construction, structure, matter) and venustas (beauty, plasticity, appearance, aesthetics) architecture arises as a unified ensemble, where each of these elements is interdependent and each is somewhat ought to have a similar relative importance—in a way, we can call it architecture understood as a kin form- structure. However, with certain interpretations of notions such as systems or type it can also be implied an enactment of what we can call a discrete understanding of the architectural form. Although constructively highlighted in the least since the Gothic separation of wall and bearing structure, it is more clearly in a post-industrial world that a discrete acknowledgment of the reality of construction has found a fertile ground to evolve. In architectural thinking, the notion may primarily be ascribed to a distinction derived from Gottfried Sempers’s studies of building artifacts that led him to break away from the Vitruvian triad, distinguishing the elements into classifications falling either into the tendentiously heavy/stable stereotomics of the earthwork or the tendentiously lightweight tectonics of the frame264. Similarly, it also finds bonds with the distinction between the dry and the wet (or fluid) methods of joining derived from the early crafts. In any case, the related notion of tectonic, as implied by Frampton in his own professed architectural triad—topos, typos and tectonic—but fundamentally the categories developed by authors such as John Habraken, Francis Duffy, Stewart Brand, or Bernard Leupen, have been valuable contributions for this discussion. Overall, among these approaches it is noteworthy a compromise between both an abstract and/or representational sphere (type) and a material and/or sensorial sphere (tectonic) within an environmental setting (topos). Discursively, in architectural history and theory, these can be credited to an early acknowledgement of the architectural form from a rational perspective that can be traced back to the technical evolution comprising matter and craft. In a first stage, these would eventually lead to a space-time perspective typical of modernity, with rationalizing contours of a hierarchical order. How- ever, with the posterior introduction of a timescale perspective of the architectural form in the discourse, eventually it too aroused a perspective crediting the relative, networked relations over hierarchical ones. With it, has also aroused a discrete understanding of the once kin-conceivable architectural form.

3.3.1 MATTER, CRAFT AND REASON From an evolutionary perspective, the primitive hut still fundamentally stands as a believable ontological model of architecture, which finds one of its most famous expressions in the description of the XVIIIth century architect Marc-Antoine Laugier, in his Essai sur l 'architecture [“An Essay on Archi- tecture”], published in 1753. In it, Laugier distinguished two main architectural elements that lay at the basis of all architecture, the supporting branches (structure) and the protecting leaves (enclosure, or protective layer)265. In such a raw technological state, materials have a direct correspondence in construc- tional function and do not require any particularly sophisticated craft. Although speculative, Laugier’s model endured probably by the sake of its simplicity, from the belief that progressive simple transformations are the ultimate guide informing architectural design. He did it notwithstanding his underlying intents of legitimizing aesthetical tendencies through the seemingly rational logics of the origins, justifying an evolutional process towards the orders of the Greek temple, and thereby setting it apart of an arbitrary mimicking of ancient models. To the model of the hut, Quatremère de Quincy would add the cave and the tent as further speculative original models, where the cave relates to hunters, the tent to the nomadic gatherers, and the hut to settled agricultural social milieus, thus adding a social co-relation to the technical sphere of matter and craft. The cave represents little or nothing of constructive intents and few remains in it of architectural or projective suggestion, aside its primal shelter purpose266. Nonetheless, the addition of a rock solid cave notion brings a new material insight to the architectural discourse, that of the solidity, robustness, or weight, that had been absent in the explanation of the original lightweight hut, made of relatively more fragile [or seemingly ephemeral] trunks, branches and leaf’s. As Kenneth Frampton pointed out, Karl Otfried Müller’s Hanbuch der Archäologie der Kunst (Hand- book of the Archaeology of Art) (1830), related the hut model to a series of applied art forms producing things such as “utensils, vases, dwellings and meeting places of men”267, which imply both a more intricate technical knowledge and an artistic insight. With it, it is also remarked the implications of the dry jointing understanding of the term, noting that the specialized use of tektones, referring “to people in construction or cabinet makers, not however, to clay and metal workers”. In a further clarification of the term, Frampton adds the contribution of Karl Bötticher in his Die Tektonik der Hellen [“The Tectonic of the Hellenes”], published in three volumes between 1843 and 1852. In it appears a key distinction between Kernform and Kunstform, that is, between the original wood elements in a Greek temple, and their artistic translation in stone through the trighlyphs or metopes of the classical entablature. From Böt- ticher tectonic hence emerges as “signifying a complete system binding all the parts of the Greek temple into a single whole”268. A representational sphere is thus added, where the original wood and leaf’s are only present insofar as a reminder, a motive that no longer requires a correspondence in a material/craft sphere, but where the relational features are preserved in a rational domain.

Also building upon the primitive hut model, Gottfried Semper (b.1803–d.1879) in his Four Ele- ments of Architecture (1852), distinguished four basic features of architecture: Herd (hearth), Erdaufwurf (earthwork), Dach (roofwork, including the roof’s support structure), and Umfriedigung (enclosure, or covering membrane). Making use of an historic and ethnographic background, Semper ontologically related these elements with the ancient crafts—the hearth to ceramics and metalwork, the earthwork to masonry, the roofwork to carpentry, and the enclosure to the “art of dressing (the walls), that is, weaving and wickerwork”. The focus is not exclusive on the crafts, acknowledging the elements in terms of production and materials. It also includes what, in our view, is the key concept of Stoffwechsel, referring to a process by which the outward appearance remains unchanged despite a change in the material and production mode—thus, it implies the notion that forms do not necessarily need to be attached to a material truth as they can somewhat free float in appearances as long as technique allows so. Moreover, Semper categorized the construction process into two key notions—the tectonics of the frame, with lightweight components (e.g. wood posts) assembled to form a spatial matrix; and the stereotomics of the earthwork, made of the repetitive assembly of heavyweight elements (e.g. brick). For Semper’s contemporary Eugène Viollet-le-Duc (b.1814–d.1879), architecture is definitely to be framed under a rationalizing way. Viollet-le-Duc saw a world in which there was no coherent approach to architecture, and thus urged for a rationalist way. It would primarily be from the Gothic architecture that he derived his lessons on structural and formal systems, to the point of applying them to modern materials such as cast iron. Concurrently, he examined organic structures from nature for inspiration, iconically applying the influences in his Assembly Hall design (1864). Nikolaus Pevsner stressed that Viollet-le-Duc’s interest on reason towards the architectural form was an extension of a trend in France that extended back to the XVIth century, where “Delorme, …, Derand, … Cordemoy and Frézier”269 were masters valuing rigorous stability principles and clear expression of structure270. The classical architecture also delivered Viollet-le-Duc key examples of such statement, with the Greek temple regarded as a rational representation of its own construction. In that sense, the development of a new architecture was also to be based on reason in the way that the classical orders had supported temple design. He believed that reason and method were key driving forces for quality architecture271. Viollet-le-Duc thus envisioned that architecture could be produced as long as the rationalizing spirit prevailed, even if its methods and materials were subjected to change. He would exemplify it, going as far as proposing the incorporation of the iron as building material under the logic of the Gothic, in what we may now observe as a kind of collage [or pastiche], but that made perfect sense given the context and an intrinsic exploratory character. Semper’s Stoffwechsel is thus also implied, but only insofar as following fundamental rationalizing principles. Ideal forms would relate

100

with specific materials, with their appearance reflecting a rational way of designing and building, but that not meaning different materials could not be applied, as long as they kept a sense of rational truth. As a counterpoint, contradicting the methodic trends expressed by his contemporaries, for John Ruskin (b.1819–d.1900), quality architecture was tied not to a rationalizing or methodic spirit, but somewhat to the man behind architecture. The vision is stated in The Seven Lamps of Architecture (1849), where historically the logic of the structure had nothing to do with it, and although he appreciated the truth in materials, he saw it more in terms of honesty with oneself, with history, or the crafts, and not of reason. For Ruskin, the interpretation that the Gothic had been primarily the result of a rationalizing approach was a far too simple story, and thus the developments of the epoch signified a decline, a drift from the virtues of former architectures: “We want no new style of architecture... The forms of architecture already known are good enough for us, and far better than any of us”272. Architecture was thus not to be redefined as if everything was wrong with what had brought it to that point. Anyhow, despite Ruskin’s plea, as we now know, the modernists that followed would be particularly keen of Viollet- le-Duc’s rationalizing appeal.

3.3.2 SPACE, TIME AND NETWORK Semper had left behind the Vitruvian archetypal view, instead relating architecture with an evolutionary view that relates with the materials and the crafts. However, he did not went so far as to distinguish the internal order, from an external order of the building elements. Some years later, Adolf Loos (b.1870–d.1933) would promote the internal space to a class of its own, addressing the elements that typically find their place within an architectural encasing: “The architect’s general task is to provide a warm and livable space. Carpets are warm and livable. He decides for this reason to spread out one carpet on the floor and to hang up four to form the walls. But you cannot build a house out of carpets. Both the carpet on the floor and the tapestry on the wall require a structural frame to hold them in the correct place. To invent his frame is the architect’s second task”273. Semper had referred to origins of the tectonic of the exterior through the covering membrane made of weaving and wickerwork. Loos used similar elements—the textiles and carpets—to imply an internal tectonic, thus also a spatial terminology in the discourse. It would be from both a seemingly rationalizing spirit, and a spatial understanding of architecture, its motions and shapes, that Le Corbusier would establish his five points, the pilotis, free plan, free façade, fenêtre en longueur (horizontal window), and roof gardens. With it, he added both a spatial understanding of the architectural form, with the spirit of a machine age. Indeed, a free plan or façade, provided by an independence from the main structure, are only conceivable through an underlying abstract spatial understanding. Moreover, these ascribe to a mechanical sphere where, ideally, constructive parts have the freedom of a modulor-regulated grid or the like to find their place in architectural works, or where the roof gardens help providing fresh air and rest for the workers of a machine-enacted society.

101

Finally, these follow a rationalistic tone, where the functioning of the different elements implies a certain degree of independence in relation to the others, each following its own idiosyncrasies. The posterior supports theory, by John Habraken274 (1972), would clear possible formal misconceptions to which a literal understanding of Le Corbusier’s five principles could lead on to, liberating it to a purely methodological sphere with no constraining aprioristic imagery, such as the fenêtre en longueur. Le Corbusier himself would implicitly make a self-critic in his later works as, for instance, Ron- champ had little or nothing to do with the five principles. Anyhow, Habraken sets a fundamental distinction between support (e.g. base building) and infill (e.g. interior fit-out), where on each are assigned different levels of expertise and responsibility on the different hierarchies and times of the elements composing the building. The distinction is fundamentally methodological, not constrained to any sort of aprioristic imagery, which although lacking a concretization, conversely contributes to its free interpretation, easing its adaptation to different contexts. Anyhow, the fundamental contribution of the support and infill perspective of the supports theory seems to be that of the introduction of a new temporal perspective. That is, a perspective of a timescale awareness on the understanding of the architectural form, regarding it not as a stagnant, crystalized entity, but as a process that has different parts to it, that can change in different moments, and so forth. Indeed, the categories that had been previously put forward by different authors did not suffice to frame, for instance, the countless technical apparatus required in contemporary buildings, and which often deeply constraint the architectural possibilities. In that sense, the concept of shearing layers, coined by an English architect, Francis Duffy275, in his Measuring Building Performance, first published in 1993, would bring a new insight. In brief, the concept of shearing layers entails a particular approach to a discrete idea of systems in architecture, referring to elements that are interrelated, but whose underlying idea is that they can be seamlessly detached. The space-time context, scale or modes in which this detachment occurs will vary in each considered system. The concept has since notoriously been further developed by Stewart Brand in his How Build- ings Learn: What Happens After they are Built (1995)276. A more recent approach, conducted by the Dutch architect, Bernard Leupen277, in his Frame and Generic Space (2006), expanded its scope. The underlying conceptualization finds a very close match in software development. In architecture, the core idea in a shearing layers conception is that buildings are ought to be conceived bearing in mind that they are composed by different elements (or layers) that have different life spans. As in nature, there are processes operating in different timescales, and therefore the trades of energy, matter or information is meager, scarce or non-existent between them—a geological era has little or no relation with an ant colony, although both are part of the natural world. Adopting this concept that can be called of hierarchical ecosystem278 to buildings, Brand demonstrated that traditional buildings were more adaptable because they allowed more freedom to its layers, for instance, with

102 faster layers (e.g. services) not blocked by slower ones (e.g. structure). We could assume that the hierarchical positioning of these layers is straightforwardly definable with elements such as those of the structure preceding elements such as those of the services or partitions, and so forth. However, even if in material or constructive terms that aprioristically makes sense in most cases, that is not necessarily an absolute rule, not at least from a conceptual point of view, and hence it matters to understand how these categories can mingle. For a start, the underlying principle of Habraken’s support/infill terminology is generic, and implies a binary distinction that follows a reciprocity and complementarity logic rather than hierarchical, thus leaving plenty of room for interpretation. Habraken further develops the theme, decisively contributing to clarify how we may understand the placement (hierarchical or not) of the different spatial or constructive elements or components279. From an analysis of the house type, Habraken establishes three main categories which can be easily generalizable to other architectural types: as a spatial organization, as a physical system, or as a stylistic way. It could be argued that these categories resemble a certain Vitruvian inspiration, and accordingly we could relate the spatial organization with utilitas, the physical system with firmitas, or the stylistic way with venustas. However, on the core of Habraken’s proposal stands that these categories can be discretely analyzed and developed, and that is fundamentally di- vergent from a Vitruvian way where is foremost stressed a kin—i.e. sculptural or objectual, univocal or interdependent—nature of the architectural form. If setting these categories hierarchically, the spatial organization in most cases would likely be assumed as the most important, as it is more intimately related to our behavior. Indeed, we may observe technological evolution without it affecting much the main patterns in which we take hold of space. In second place, it would probably most commonly come the physical system. The physical system is not only about the materials being used, or how they are put together, but also as how types of physical parts are chosen (e.g. columns, walls, and furniture with certain characteristics) and how they are related and distributed in space, therefore on how the types of physical elements are prioritized. In third place, the stylistic way, which acts in a thinner level. It is about how certain characteristics can be inculcated (e.g. a certain color, material, texture) which are not depending of a spatial or of a physical organization, but nonetheless can affect the modes in which they can be thought of in the first place, as well as the perception of it. However, if we observe cases such as the traditional Japanese house, in which spaces appear in succession, or are enclosed, then we realize that the main characteristics of a physical system or of a stylistic system can be kept while transforming the spatial system. In another known example, in classical Greece, the columns (a known physical architectural entity) were in marble, but as in what Semper describes as Stoffwechsel, mutatis mutandis, Palladio’s classical columns were often made of brick and

103

plaster. Here stand two physical entities, which are seemingly the same, with similar spatial and structural attributes and even with a similar appearance, but which are indeed different in their materials and technologies. Here, the stylistic system precedes the physical system, and thus we can call to evidence Semper’s Stoffwechsel. Thus, we can acknowledge that although a certain hierarchy may be established between elements of a discrete analysis, the same hierarchy, even if it typically fits, will not necessarily follow the same logic in different circumstances, and hence a stylistic system may instead precede a spatial system, and so forth. Therefore, that opens up room for an analytical understanding of the different systems where precedencies cannot be aprioristically set, since they are not absolute, yet relative to the object of analysis. Instead, they can be understood more from a horizontal perspective, which is not necessarily hierarchical, but more of a network kind. Hence, the intricacy of relations between different, discretized elements can acquire more complex contours than what could be assumed at first sight with a slow vs fast layer understanding, as proposed by Brand. As of its application, a discrete, networked way of observing the architectural design provides a conceptual frame in which design no longer needs to be unique or repetitive. This can make even more sense when observing the modernist housing production, where typological repetition was often a means and uniformity was often a result. At least theoretically, that opens rooms to make use of the subtleties of the types, instead of limiting it to some sort of typological repetition. Accordingly, instead of uniformity, we can work with similarity and thus enact difference, avoiding rigidity or monotony when it is unwanted. When a large production is required, we may work first with the essential typological elements that are shared by every unit, leaving enough blank canvas for posterior decisions. As Habraken refers, “the result of such an approach can be very rich and varied, and yet systematic and efficient to build. (…) It may be evident that this layering approach is only possible when a type is clearly understood and analyzed in its formal organization”280.

3.3.3 SYSTEMS AND SHEARING LAYERS Semper referred to four elements, and introduced the key concept of Stoffwechsel. To this, Loos added an implied spatial consideration with an internal category. From the 1960’s onwards the supports theory, by Habraken, stood out as a proposal for giving inhabitants a meaningful participative role in the design process. By the 1990’s, Francis Duffy, developed a categorization system, dividing the building in three layers: shell (e.g. structure and enclosing), services (e.g. piping and wiring systems, elevators, and so on) and scenery (e.g. internal subdivision and finish)281. Stewart Brand, whose work broadly reveals a great concern in sustainability issues in building construction, developed a similar, yet expanded, system of categories, distinguishing building into site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff (i.e. non-architectural and/or decorative elements such as wallpaper or furniture)282. Bernard

104 Leupen, whose work reveals a great concern with spatial-constructive flexibility and adaptability issues (i.e. what he calls changeability, which comprises alterability, positive or negative extendibility, and polyvalence) devised a system, that included both Duffy’s and Brand’s concepts, using the categories of structure, skin, scenery, services, and access283. Broadly, all of these conceptualizations are implied in a shearing layers perspective, founded in a discrete acknowledgement of the architectural form. As of the terminology, a layer can be regarded as a particular kind of system, which is autonomous in itself, that may or not be combined with others, which stands on its own or requires at least another to be conceivable. As a self-sustaining combined or standalone entity (i.e. needing no additional other to be conceivable) a layer can be considered as what Leupen calls a frame, which can also be considered as another kind of system. By acquiring the condition of frame, the elements that constitute it may acquire the ability to relate with others without losing their inner relations, which will be, in Leupen’s terminology, via processes of disconnection, excision and articulation. The ways these can be handled depend not only on the philosophy that is thought of to be implemented, but also on the characteristics of the materials in use—e.g. whether if it is used fluid or dry processes of linking construction elements—the effort that their morphing requires, and so on. As had been subscribed in Habraken’s non- -hierarchical understanding of his spatial, physical and stylistic systems, in the essence of Leupen’s approach, even the seemingly lowered ranked items, such as furniture—included in scenery—can constitute a frame for the remaining. Therefore, in architectural terms, the frame is related to the specific, encompassing elements that determine the building for a long time. The existence of a frame thus enables what Leupen calls of a generic space, which is an open-ended and unspecified kind of space. Nevertheless, implicitly or explicitly, in the ordinary practice it prevails a hierarchical approach that is typically closer to Stewart Brand’s shearing layers division, from seemingly slower to faster, between site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff. Leupen’s approach can be particularly useful in the analysis of aspects related to flexibility and changeability, as its referred dialectics determinism-changeability, dwelling-permanence, are of relevance in the discussion of the housing problem and the sustainability problematics. As the author recalls “ultimately the frame concept is about generating freedom”. The column frees the wall, as the scenery can free the space, or the skin frees the skeleton and the scenery, each with its own potentials and freedoms within the generic space determined by the frame. This freedom is personified by the possibility of changeability, which can only be enabled if there is a disconnection between the frame and the changeable. In this sense, the shearing layers located in the generic space belong to the changeable284. An issue with shearing layers is that if it is misapprehended on which layer an element belongs, it may turn out that the building becomes very difficult to use. For instance, when applying a service layer within the structure, for instance in an HVAC, it may turn out that in case of air regulations change that it will become obsolete and the entire building would have to be remade. Indeed, shearing layers

105 are difficult to get right and thus should not be addressed lightly. That was notoriously the case of the Nakagin Capsule Tower (1972), by Kisho Kurokawa, which was specifically designed to withstand the problem of varying rates of change by having replaceable living components attached to a permanent core. The capsules were to be updated as technology and style demanded, but in the end they never were. In the end, it stood out the conceptual value of the proposal, as well as its imagery, which although fake was nonetheless efficient in the transmission of its [conceptual] purpose. The construction industry has long been using the notion of construction systems, which can somewhat be described as assortments of more or less intertwining material parts, which share common constructive purposes. The purpose may be specialized to a certain say function—e.g. kitchen modules—as a constructive occurrence independent of other constructive elements or can conversely be thought of as a more or less long chain of interdependent constructive occurrences, where the change in one may affect all the others. Likewise, most cars produced by the automotive industry can be described as the result of a collection of parts, each with a specific function—e.g. engine, clutch, transmission, suspension, differential, wheels, and so on—that can be as well used in the production of other cars, or as with a more or less intensive use of proprietary, single-of use of certain components in some other cars. With interdependence, the issue is that when changing a single element, the remaining elements of such a kin structure follow in cascade. Evidently, the specialization of production methods typically works in favor of discrete and not of continuity modes. As result, even if integrated, the product inescapably becomes the goal, and the notion of a purely kin architectural entity—where e.g. everything can be designed within the building—becomes economically impractical, no more than a romanticized idea. With the thus unavoidable, de-romanticized notion of product, the difficult balance of the shearing layers is not only an issue of articulation between different layers or technology advancements, but also an issue that is intimately related with the theme of consumerism. It is undoubtful that a discrete approach, implied in a shearing layers perspective, brings a methodological insight on the alterity dimensions of architectural space, enabling a frame of though from where to develop flexibility, adaptability or polyvalence prospects in the architectural form. Moreover, it contributes to clarify potential bonds between the spatial and the physical spheres of architectural production in a context of a (post)industrial, digitally enacted, globalized world, seemingly immersed by the idea of product. Anyhow, with the speed in which technology evolves in our world, effects such as product obsolescence must also be taken into account. A clear case occurs with the so-called programmed obsolescence, a strategy often applied (or implied) by companies in consumer products, which affects the way products may or may not be not developed and used, and that is propelled by factors that may be way beyond

106 the technical knowledge, such as fashion or publicity in general. Treating buildings as mere consump- tive products may prove non-viable economically. Certainly, their typical share in families’ budget is not neglectable, and their effect on global resources consumption is certainly not ignorable. To bypass or mitigate such sort of issues, at least in theory, it would be better to acquire things that last long, that are more durable, more reliable. However, the variables involved are more complex than that, often involving social, cultural or economical dynamics that are not straightforwardly gen- eralizable285. In general, to acquire things that apparently may last longer could be assumed as a good principle. However, that is also often related to expensive items, those that most cannot afford. On the other hand, a consumerist perspective also tells us that the urge to consume, propelled by fashion, publicity and the like, eventually makes these things to be replaced not only because they reach the material end-of-life, but also because they reach their social/cultural end-of-life. This indicates that the personal shearing layers do not line up with the lifespan of the products. Furthermore, it is also likely that it suddenly comes up an improved version of that amazing object that was carefully selected to last a lifetime—in the end, programmed or not, obsolescence has many ways to show its presence. Moreover, if we try to keep things for the sake of simplicity of function, it is plausible for an unexpected development to occur, as seemingly coupled functions can become uncoupled in no time, or vice versa. On the other hand, if we try to keep functions completely separated all the time, the risk may be to spend too much time managing systems just to ensure basic work. Moreover, the more complex is the product and/or its components, the more likely will be for maintenance costs to rise up, and so forth. If in many consumer products these issues may fall under the radar, or are easily relativized, when we talk about buildings, they acquire completely different proportions, in the least because their relative financial weight in the consumers’ pocket is typically much bigger. Pondering these factors altogether, from an architectural design perspective, there is no such thing as a best approach in this matter—whether more of kin, or more of discrete, more or less robust, more or less expensive, as in every other architectural approach, design options must be carefully considered and contextualized.

107

108

II (Pre)Fabricating Architecture

There was once a barber. Some say that he lived in Seville. Wherever he lived, all of the men in this town either shaved themselves or were shaved by the barber. And the barber only shaved the men who did not shave themselves. Did the barber shave himself? Some sets, such as the set of all teacups, are not members of themselves. Other sets, such as the set of all non-teacups, are members of themselves. Call the set of all sets that are not members of themselves ‘R’. If R is a member of itself, then by definition it must not be a member of itself. Similarly, if R is not a member of itself, then by definition it must be a member of itself. “From this I conclude that under certain circumstances a definable collection does not form a totality”. —Russell’s paradox (following proposition by Bertrand Russell, 1901)

A forma é um mal da matéria. [“Form is an evil of matter.”] —in Falta (forma), album Comum (1998), Três Tristes Tigres, lyrics by Regina Guimarães and Ana Deus

When you explain a ‘why?’, you have to be in some framework that you allow something to be true, otherwise you are perpetually asking why… If you try to follow anything up, you go deeper and deeper in various directions… You could either say, I am satisfied with the answer, you could go on asking questions… When explaining electromagnetism or gravity I can go thoroughly technical, but in an early level I just have to tell you is just one of the things that you have to take as an element in the world… I cannot explain it in terms of anything else that is familiar to you, otherwise when you would start making questions over it, then I would be in trouble; I would have to cheat, and eventually I would be cheating very badly… For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled. —Richard Feynman, apropos his participation on the Challenger Disaster Committee

Believe me, that was a happy age, before the days of architects, before the days of builders. —Seneca (c. 5 BC – AD 65), Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales (Volume 1) Epistle xc

109

110

1 A PREFABRICATION TERMINOLOGY

1.1 (Post)industrial architectural production

Architecture is produced on the bond of a design sphere (mental) with a physical sphere (material), established via a constructive sphere (executive). The experience of a space thus engaged, is apprehended by the senses, through aspects such as scale, contrast, color, texture, heat or cold, which result from spatial, constructive or material options taken during the design stage286. The construction bonds a represented spatial intention to a perceptible reality, as successive layers of structures bond the elements of form. Throughout, the option to use a material or component instead of another implies not only addressing certain mental/executive purposes (functional, aesthetical, structural, and so forth), which both unleash and confine the experience potential, but also to address certain place related constraints. In the latter, on a broader level, we can include aspects derived from social, cultural, economic, or environmental contexts, and on a stricter (executive) level the availability, or ease of deployment of construction elements, different durability or maintenance aspects in agreement with the materials in use, and so forth. The modern materials and technologies contributed to enrich the vocabulary of constructive possibilities, while progressively detaching it from stricter place features. In pre-industrial times, the materiality, and its effect on form, had been more constrained to local idiosyncrasies. For instance, the dimensions of construction elements were in the least limited by their availability—in wood, limited to the available tree sizes, or in stone, by the availability of the intended batch in quarries, and so forth. Furthermore, size, weight, density, hardness or other properties had to be considered for handling, shaping, transport or, finally, the in-situ erection. In an industrialized world, many of these aspects could seemingly be eased or bypassed. Ever since, the path has been towards an apparent progress of the dematerialization of production relations, which has been further increased with the acceleration of the processes of globalization. With it, the tangibility of materials, and their implied production relations, can somewhat be reduced to an immaterial form of capital, of which in last resource a physical sphere may give place to a virtual, intangible sphere. With it, aspects of a place domain are no longer necessarily a constraint, yet it is the capital that symbolically becomes the limit for what and how architecture is produced. Nonetheless, the analogy of the place constraints remains largely valid to illustrate the intricacy of the multi-dimensional relations of architectural production, as denoted by the conventional materials and the archetypal forms in architectural history. The archetypal Greek temple is plausibly based on a wood construction type translated to stone. However, stone’s properties are different, with positive or negative yields which must be pondered. For instance, stone has the potential to last longer when exposed to the elements, but it does not

111

support the beam’s bending moment as flexibly as wood potentially does. Using a material instead of another can conduct to different construction principles, but also to different design philosophies. For instance, a stone beam may be able to support more weight for the same span than a wood beam, but, consequently, the supporting columns need to be more robust to support the added weight of the entire system. In the least, the resulting form will have a different appearance than if it had been made in wood. Anyhow, a comparison between different constructive systems extends beyond their spatial features and dimensioning in correlation to material or structural properties. In the least, these depend on a balance between intentionality and the possibilities to deliver it, between a purpose and a technological context. For instance, the columns of the Egyptian Luxor Temple (~1500-1200BC) have such a density that altogether seem like a solid mass. The effect is incomparably lighter in the Parthenon (~447BC), where, due to the visual density of its components, from far sight it seems like an impenetrable volume, whereas in a closer sight it becomes permeable, creating a transitional fluidity towards the interior. If the constructive type derived from the Greek temple had known span limitations, with the constructive philosophy introduced through the Rome Pantheon (current building: 113-125 AD), spans could thereon be significantly expanded. The constructive principle lays in a dome geometry, where the iconic innovation is to mimic the compression principles of the arch onto a circular area, instead of a rectangular area in plan. From the top of the cylindrical wall base, an ingenious box-like formwork enabled the curvature of the dome to be built level by level, using a non-reinforced precursor ancestor of today’s concrete. All compressive forces are discharged to the cylindrical base, which transmits the loads vertically to the ground. Yet, in a way, we could regard cylinder base and dome as two constructively independent elements. Indeed, the cylinder-shaped walls are self-supporting, which makes it structurally independent from the dome. Conversely, we can conjecture that the dome could have been laid in a different support, say in a column and architrave system, instead of a mass- like wall. Thus, in the Rome Pantheon it can be said that the dome and its support are structurally discrete. In the Middle Ages, the archetypal Gothic mode of building would bring a different insight, with emphasis given to light and verticality. To achieve it, an ingenious use of its ogival arches, ribbed vaults and flying buttresses replaced the solid walls as structural elements. Unlike in the semi-circular Roman and Romanesque vaults, the archetypal Gothic vault channels the weight of the building elements onto bearing piers, or columns, at a steep angle, enabling it to be raised higher. In the structural schemata, supporting weight was channeled to bearing shafts with less outward thrust than what a semicircular vault would have required, hence resulting in less weighty walls. The flying buttresses contributed in an overall visual weight loss. Instead of a mass supporting directly gravity, a complex, ingenious skeleton of support and counter support enabled thinner, while higher elements. The diet

112 also allowed walls to be freed from structure, letting more light to come in. All of it achieved with roughly the same materials that the Greeks or the Romans had available287. Throughout the ages, ingenuity alone successively increased the knowledge of construction materials and processes, thereby expanding the spectrum of architectural possibilities. When machines became a pervasive part of our world, the process acquired greater proportions. That was ignited in the early days of the Industrial Revolution, when high quality iron became widely available due to the devising of new techniques of ironwork in the foundries. Cast iron, then wrought iron, and finally steel introduced new possibilities, in an iterated improvement of machines and technologies, which, in time, would also impact the building construction. The technical characteristics of these materials, their production methods, size and weight, bolting, welding or other joining methods, and so forth, called for new ways of planning and erecting the constructions. For instance, the characteristics of steel lead to a very short tolerance for corrections in-situ, and in this sense, it was not as moldable as masonry or concrete (the typical fluid bonded materials), or even wood. Its use can comparably be as precise as wood construction, yet more difficult to handle manually, since simple adjustments of parts in-situ are a lot harder to make. It thus called for factory-precision methods, and hence the way towards prefabrication was wide open288. Its precision inherently demanded an improved calculus and dimensioning, which enabled the reduction of structural sections and increase of spans, thus contributing to establish new architectural quality standards. With the rise of reinforced concrete technology, the universe of possibilities would further increase. Aside the exceptional architectural landmarks, in the history of building construction, most buildings have been erected with comparably less sophisticated materials or technologies, in wood, brick or stone, or also of earth or debris. Generally, these have followed an economic sense by using readily available materials and the like, making use of known technologies that have slowly, and solidly, evolved in time. Following gravity, the wall initially had both a structural and spatial function, and later would be freed from a supporting role. With the introduction of steel or reinforced concrete the material proportion of bearing elements significantly decreased, allowing increased possibilities as well as the potential for a more affordable approach, somewhat democratizing the principle. Anyhow, there seems to be a dynamic halt between an instructed architectural sphere and a wise vernacular sphere and/or an advanced industrial sphere. There are the needed, casual, ordinary, or evolutionary practices, but there is also the product, accounted, measured, predicted, automated or marketed, and finally, there is architecture in-between. The dialectics finds its first prescribers in modernism, but has been approached ever since. Indeed, the vernacular, as the industrial forms and methods have often been depicted as ideal for certain practices supposedly or in fact attempting to incorporate their spirit289. Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret’s praise to both the machine and the vernacular, testimonies it: “We must find and apply new methods, clear methods, allowing us to work out useful plans for the home, lending themselves

113 naturally to standardization, industrialization, Taylorization (mass production). If our diagnosis of the sheer inade- quacy of traditional methods were not more than enough in itself to impel us to look for new solutions, the history of architecture (our own past, or sometimes even the present in other climates) would show us that other methods of house construction exist or have existed which are infinitely more flexible, more deeply and richly architectural than those made popular by what is taught in the schools”290. A mechanistic ethos would nonetheless have a more visible impact. Unlike in the Parthenon, whose technology only allowed compression strengths, with the evolution of construction technologies, architects have progressively been allowed more liberty. To an architecture liberated from the bearing wall, it added that technologies such as the reinforced concrete were relatively cheaper and easier to handle. Referencing to the Dom-Ino concept, formalizing it into a single-family house, Le Corbusier’s Maison Citrohan (1920), a play of words with the car brand Citroën, was clearly stating that houses can be standardized as cars are—the “machine à habiter”. In the referential Toward a New Architecture (1923), Le Corbusier writes: “if we eliminate from our hearths and minds all dead concepts in regard to the house and look at the question from a critical and objective point of view, we shall arrive at the ‘House-Machine’, the mass production house, healthy (and morally so too) and beautiful in the same way that the working tools and instruments which accompany our existence are beautiful”291. Following the machine narrative, later on, the Villa Savoye (1928-31) would arise as a modernist archetype, where, conceptually, the vertical elements—façade, stairs, pilotis, or the thin curved wall in the ground floor—are discretized from the plan. However, the executive application of the mental intents is not full-proof. In fact, although the elements are depicted as components of a machine, they are materially and formally bounded. The house is an autonomous object, just like a car, but the parallel of the machine stops there. Indeed, one cannot imagine replacing one of its parts by some different other, and so forth. In this perspective, the Dom-Ino was another incongruous example, which could not be industrially (re)producible as it was conceptualized292. Nevertheless, given its simplicity, it endured a great potential for replication or appropriation. In that sense, and in that sense only, it was in line with the epithet it proclaimed. Indeed, notwithstanding the historical value of the narrative per se, and circumstances in which these examples were produced, on today’s standards the most resembling artifact to a machine in Le Corbusier’s buildings was the automobiles he often (and strategically) placed in the photos of his buildings as a means for propaganda of his ideas. With heavy, wall-based structural construction, historically the issue has largely been where to make the openings, and the Gothic proved that the wall could be liberated from the structure. With concrete, steel or other manufactured materials, appropriating and expanding some of the technological virtues of natural materials such as wood or stone, the issue shifts, as the structures become independent of the other material functions of the building. Filtering light or access becomes no longer a core concern, as such can be solved in latter stages, either passively (i.e. constructively), or

114 actively (i.e. technologically), with wiring, piping, and so forth, giving the services or the like a relevance of its own. Complexity of buildings increases, opening room for different construction elements to gain a potential of excision, thus becoming more prone to be part of the design frame since early stages, and making design itself more and more a discrete matter, requiring numerous specialized fields. According to different discrete philosophies, for instance, façades can be regarded as screens, internal walls as movable elements, or even the main structure can be though-off to easy dismantling for when buildings end-up their useful life. Different discrete philosophies also endure different potential types of forms. With automation, buildings become more and more an assembly of discrete components and, with the aid of digital tools—helping to design and organize the constructions or to technologically enable the construction of once impossible forms—the idea of endless possibilities, as brought about by capital over place, is apparently reinforced.

115

1.2 An evolutionary view of lightweight dry construction practices

A certain story suggests that a Chicago carpenter, George W. Snow, invented the balloon frame in 1832, revolutionizing the construction practice in the USA. However, facts show that this was not exactly a revolutionary idea, nor that it was invented by Snow. Instead, it is more likely the result of a simplification of the timber frame principles throughout the years. It is part of a major arch of a continuous quest which contextually attempts to achieve economies in construction while delivering quality, accomplished by making use of interrelated principles such as reduction (e.g. of material, waste or labor), speed (e.g. through mechanization) or efficiency (e.g. through quality control). These come from an ancient lineage from where contemporary frame systems also find their roots. Timber construction is an ancient mode of building whose records can be found since the Neo- lithic. It can generally be described as a method for creating structures typically using heavy, squared- off and fitted and joined timber. Such probably came from a handcrafted way of making things out of logs and tree trunks without the aid of mechanical means, but with all sorts of hand-powered tools such as axes, adzes, draw knives, or auger drill bits. With these, in the old days, woodwork was slowly and laboriously shaped by building artisans, which in the more isolated milieus were also often their very dwellers293. Unlike in wall-supported constructions, in such methods, since bearing forces are transmitted to posts, the interior can be spatially released. The number of posts ultimately depends on the available span dimensions, which is constrained by the characteristics of the available wood— type of wood, drying mode, length, section, and so forth. A more sophisticated version of such methods is what would become known as timber frame—also known as half-timber or post and beam, among other regional variations. These are structures typically made of sawmilled wooden posts, beams and braces, connected through pins, wedges and grooves. The space between the wooden elements is filled by mortar and stone or brick, which are left visible or covered by materials such as plastered wattle and daub, weatherboarding, or tiles. Such infill has no structural function, is mostly weather proofing, hence alternatively it may be left empty and the structure can simply be covered with wood planks or boards. Such sort of method was developed in many parts of the world, such as medieval Europe and ancient Japan. Because of its varied occurrence, crossing many different periods and places, there are many different labels naming historic framing styles. For instance, in Brazil, a famous example became known as enxaimel. In Portugal, a famous example is found in the gaiola pombalina294. Such labelling usually has to do with local specificities surrounding the system, such as climate or seismic conditions, informing the type of foundations, beam intersections, roof frame details, joints, decorative modes, and so on. In several of these cases, the outside of the structural wood elements is left exposed showing both frame and infill, becoming a distinctive decorative feature, leaving plaster, brick or stone visible. In a late Middle Ages example, such approach with the use of plaster became known in

116 Germany as fachwerk. In the same period, in England, a somewhat similar system became known as Tudor style. It was used throughout Europe, tendentiously more in northern and/or rainier areas, with more abundance of wood supply, such as in Scandinavian countries, certain areas of France, Poland, Swit- zerland, and so on. In the southern and/or drier European areas, such raw material availability was not so profuse and whether conditions to allow a permanent outdoor use were not so favorable. In these areas, ordinary construction typically relayed more on the use of structural supporting walls, using robust walls of stone or of mixed stone, mortar, rumble and other aggregates, adobe construction, and so forth. To combine such mixes, and according to the type of constructive case, techniques using clay, lime or others in hydrated mixes were used as bonding elements. Exception in such systems could occur in roof structures, typically using wood elements and occasional large-section wood logs tying supporting walls and used as support for wood floors, and the like, resting on the large walls, or intermediate wood posts in the case of larger spans. In many of these, iron-cast elements were used where available to reinforce and provide enhanced lateral stability in the connections. In others, such as in the traditional Japanese wood construction, the intricacy of the joints would be the only elements bonding the different parts, allowing a greater flexibility to better withstand seismic motion. The difference between the walls, using hydrated elements, and the remaining, using wood and steel elements would arguably contribute to the arousal of a popular distinction between what is commonly called dry construction and wet construction. The case of the Iberian Peninsula is peculiar, as historically there is a clear evidence of advanced knowledge of woodwork, which was applied in naval construction295, but where the frame never became generalized in common construction, although used in some very specific cases—e.g. the vernacular fisherman’s settlement of Palheiros da Tocha, in Cantanhede, Portugal. Such is expressive of the causalities of the raw material availability in the progress of common construction practices, their intrinsic implications in the formulation of a construction culture, and even of the formulation of an architectural culture, on the modes in which forms are understood and reformulated over and over. American pioneers brought the know-how of ancient construction practices from their home- lands into a land which had abundant forest resources. On the late 1500’s, in Colonial America, and particularly New England, the abundance of wood and the English tradition of building made the timber frame house popular. Entire towns were built with such structure. During the colonial period (independence is declared in 1776) and onwards, carpenters would devise a simplification of the timber frame to allow for faster construction with materials of standardized dimensions. On the mid 1600’s, carpenters in Virginia devised a method for rapid construction of their buildings, decisively developing the timber frame into a system using smaller sections and hence lighter wood parts296.

117

The balloon frame evolved slowly over the course of the nineteenth century. It resulted from modest shifts in the practice of many carpenters over time. That resulted in a widespread typifying of construction elements, which would endure until the late 1940’s as a common method in the USA. Typ- ically, a 1×4in (2.5×10.2cm) board, called a ledger, was nailed into vertical timber members, called studs, which ran continuously to the height of the building. The studs, typically 2×4in (5.1×10.2cm) or 2×6in (5.1×15.3cm) and spaced in 16in (40.6cm) centers, were notched to accommodate the ledger. The second-floor joists were also notched and then hooked onto the ledger. The joists were then nailed to the studs. The studs extended from the base sill up to the top plate and support intermediate floor joists and the roof rafters or trusses to a height of up to two floors. The idea was not original. As the carpenters in seventeenth-century Virginia had done, they employed a similar method when confronted with pressures to build rapidly. However, the balloon frame had the edge of having lightweight and compact studs, making the parts easier to transport and handle in the worksite, which also made houses more prone to be built without skilled labor. Additionally, with the industrialization of several skills and technologies, such as the industrially manufactured steel nails or a myriad of manufactured steel joints in the 19th century, alleviating the task of connecting wood members, the entire building process could increasingly be speeded up. By such characteristics, the balloon frame eloquently depicts the moment in which industrialization enters the domain of housing construction. The methods would evolve to other forms of structural wood construction, such as the platform frame, or even with a technological shift, by applying analogous principles in steel construction, as it is the case with the contemporary use of cold-formed steel (CFS) profiles297. Eventually, the old balloon frame developed in the USA would reveal disadvantages, such as the requirement for long wood members, making supply more difficult and expensive, or the tendency of inadequately treated wood to shrink and/or warp over time, making construction flaws to more easily arise over time when using long wood members. Nevertheless, the great disadvantage that has ultimately lead its usage to an end, was that the path of fire along the studs had to be obstructed with fire stoppers, otherwise making it an authentic box of matches, as the great Chicago fire in 1871 has dramatically exemplified. Consequently, in the late 1940’s the early balloon frame method was banned by many building codes in the USA. In wood construction, this has lead the method to be largely replaced by the platform frame. More recently, with the replacement of wood with CFS profiles, with different fire safety issues, the ballon frame setup has been having a change to comeback in some circumstances. Unlike in the balloon frame, in the platform frame the walls (or stud bays) are story-height. The floors (or joist bays) are laid independently. This non-dependency of elements sets a new construction philosophy, enabling different architectural possibilities. Since it is laid floor by floor, the total building height is no longer constrained by limitations in the material dimensions. Instead, the height becomes

118

limited by the very material properties, cross-section or bracing methods. Yet it is not limitless. Given the intrinsic lightweight principles, which lead to a minimization of cross-sections, typically a platform frame can generate up to four levels, twice as much as with the balloon frame. The non-dependency of elements is also reflected in the roof structure, where the spans are freed, since no longer necessarily constrained by a bracing function to the building-height studs. Such often leads to a preference on the use of trusses, which are more prone to ex-situ works and by that ensuring better quality while reducing the typically longer and messier in-situ labor. As in balloon frame, the spatial gaps between the structural members usually allow space for placement of installations, and the window and door openings dispose of a great degree of freedom, if not coinciding with eventual toughened bracing areas which can often be used to improve lateral stability. Whether in wood or steel, the ballon frame and the platform frame have become two widespread building techniques, making it now an aged-old tradition. In its inceptions, timber frame was grounded on a premise of local material availability, provided by abundance of wood from nearby forests, and ballon frame and platform frame followed. That explains why its use became so profuse in places where timber is plentifully available, such as Scandinavia, the USA or Canada. Technological development took it further, and as different methods and techniques evolved, so did the systems. These systems currently no longer depend on a particular availability of material or of its characteristics. With globalization, in a way these have become information and knowledge of construction possibilities. As this constructive knowledge is mastered and further defied by introducing new challenges, whether spatial, technological or material, architecture gains news possibilities. Besides, given the general characteristics that can be recognized in such systems, namely a great potential in ex-situ production, given the likely lightweight, which eases transportability and maneuverability, and the potential for dry connections, improving speed of works, these kinds of systems are often designated as prefabrication systems. However, such terminology may not be entirely accurate, raising the need for further clarification.

119 1.3 Towards a prefabrication definition

With the barber paradox, Bertrand Russell implies that no definition will ever be total. Yet, unlike in pure logics, in the case of linguistics, self-reference or a truth predicate is allowed, since, in it, representational principles are also implicitly valued. Addressing consistency is more a matter of logics than of linguistics, but there is a necessary presence of a certain generalization degree at each level of analysis for the handling of any matter to be possible298. Hence, in the least, an awareness of the implied weaknesses should be present when undertaking a definition. Added to these difficulties, the term prefabrication is surrounded of biases, making it harder to reach more consensual grounds. As opposed to a general idea that the constructive practices are something that evolves in time, the notion of prefabrication has arguably aroused linked to a notion of providing fast, immediate solutions where a patient, evolving place transaction of materials and skills was not possible or not so economical. That is only conceivable in a post-industrial frame, when it became more feasible to produce some constructive elements away, in factory. Nevertheless, earlier related examples can be found far back. Laugier’s mythical hut was made of trunks and leaves collected in nature which would be transported and/or prepared in a place that could differ from the final assembly location. Saudi-Arabian, Mongolian or American Indian hunter-gatherer societies made transportable huts299. Ancient romans had amazingly effective building systems. Anyhow, that does not necessarily mean these examples can be considered as prefabrication, not at least by our current technological state, which raises another difficulty in its definition, because it makes it context-dependent—i.e., a notion that changes, as technological state-of-the-art does. For ages, man has built homes piece-by-piece, dealing with the irregularity of nature, labor quality, and so on. In such approach, as materials arrive to the construction site, they can often be stored out- doors, exposed to the elements, and that may present more vulnerability to delays, price fluctuations, and the like. The notion of prefabrication is often presented in contrast to these practices, in which in the very least is implied a transfer of a certain degree of the work from the final building site to a different location. Although many things have evolved since a pre-industrial era, in most places throughout the world, the construction industry currently still relies a lot on in-situ manual labor [complement with: Annex, II.1 Outline and challenges of the housing and the construction sector in Europe]. It adds that the construction industry is still often stated as backwards in relation with others, as the auto-motive, shipbuilding or aerospace industries, with which has classically been compared with, and which still is frequently referred as embedded in a sort of fascination on aspects of these300. The praise carries the promise of more efficient construction modes, with faster, easier, better controlled processes, where economies of scale may be more effectively attained, and so forth. Although the term prefabrication is pervasive in the construction industry, it is often expressed in common language with a negative connotation301. Various factors contribute to such negativity, as it is still the case with a certain stigma in public opinion on post-war prefabs. However, such negativity is

120

not generalized, nor it happens with the same presumptions in each of the main geographical groups where it recognizably has been having a more advanced implementation, namely in North America, Japan and some European countries [complement with: Annex, II.2 Prefabrication of houses: A historical and socio-cultural survey]. Nonetheless, the term is also often positively related with production features—e.g. mass-production, standardization, specialization or organization—interfering in construction processes—e.g. quality, time, cost, or building safety. With it, there can also be an assumption of generally improved production conditions that might be reflected in the speed (e.g. less days to completion), economy (e.g. overall gains in efficiency of construction processes and sub-processes reflected on the budget), social (e.g. improved working conditions) or environmental performances (e.g. less material waste). In that sense, plausibly there are gains in overall construction quality comparatively with solutions that are more dependent on in-situ works, although that may not be always true. Anyhow, architectural arguments can easily be relegated to a secondary plan, submerged by overwhelming technological apparatus or simply by mighty business as usual tendencies. It matters to distinguish prefabrication from the industrialization of construction practices, although these can partially coincide. Industrialization is a reality in construction and such is of no exclusivity in what can be called prefabrication. With bigger or smaller component size and complexity when it comes to assembly in a building’s final location, a great deal of the materials in use nowadays is industrially produced. Even in some of the so-called traditional methods, where archetypally materials are, unit by unit, prepared and/or assembled in-situ, age-old practices can be expanded, making use of by bigger components to speed up site assembly—e.g. the case of bricklaying, where the use of industrially panelized brick walls can occur instead of laying brick-by-brick. Worldwide exceptions to a conspicuous use of industrialized materials in building construction may only be found in those rare and special cases where age-old manual techniques still have some local impact—e.g. the case of Berber houses in some Moroccan zones, still built with ancient adobe technology. Nonetheless, these necessarily make use of tools or transport and deployment machinery that was not available in a pre- industrial world. Inevitably, the vast majority of the current practice must combine both industrially and/or remotely produced elements (ex-situ) with local works (in-situ)—Table 1 gives a general idea of the implementation of ex-situ works in different areas of the building industry.

Type of Building Level of ex-situ work (%) Rationalized housing 25-35 Industrial building site processes 20-30 Standard ready-built (reinforced concrete, steel, timber) 40-60 Ready-built housing (lightweight panel system) 50-80 Modular units/sanitary blocks (reinforced concrete, steel, timber) 60-90 Mobile modular units (steel, timber) 95-100 Automobiles (for purposes of comparison) 100

Table 1. Level of ex-situ work per type of building, adapted from Bock (2006)302.

121 As industrial practices and, with it, transportation methods evolved, so did the notion of construction component, which can furthermore be related with a discrete understanding of the building construction processes. Not only it became possible to produce some elements more and better, it made more sense to assemble them in increasingly more sophisticated components. In cases, these components gather different elements brought (or not) from different manufacturing facilities. In other circumstances, these are single elements of incredible complexity, which are only possible to produce in factory-controlled environments. In many situations, components have grown so small and/or so pervasive, such as an electrical plug, a door handle, flushing toilet, or a gas boiler, that we may hardly realize them as components. In other cases, components have grown so big and complex that almost entire rooms or houses are produced ex-situ, sometimes requiring exceptional transportation methods to in-situ deployment or, as in the American mobile homes, built on their own chassis to be transported as such on the road. It is hard to find coherent nomenclature in literature dealing with prefabrication. Although not necessarily with the same meaning, the use of terminology such as offsite fabrication, industrialized construction, site assembly, among others, is seldom used alternatively to prefabrication. There are probably good reasons for that, given that it is a term that can be associated with different types of construction, which often are mistakeable, such as construction using predominantly linear principles (e.g. kit- of-parts), planar principles (e.g. panelized construction), or volumetric principles (e.g. modular construction). Anyhow, these or other related distinctions are not straightforward to establish. For instance, in cases where some name prefabrication, others may call it of systems construction—in prefabrication, the linguistic association may easily be lain in a more direct bond between a design purpose and its construction; conversely, we can regard a systems construction as independent of the design (although necessarily influencing it), that is, the same system can be used for different constructions with different purposes and designs. What is clear though in a prefabrication terminology is that there is an unequivocal relation between the idea of industrial development and the notion of constructive component, which adds to a preexistent idea of constructive system. Moreover, these terminologies occur more in a constructive sphere and not so much on a social or spatial sphere of the built environment. Thus, we believe that prefabrication must generally be accepted as a catchall term—i.e., adequate for a generic description, yet useless for a more precise development. On the plus side, due to its large possible scopes, its generalization can facilitate the communication processes surrounding it. However, in the least that raises the need to set its boundaries in relation to a subject or approach, but also to properly outline other terms that may be mistaken with it. For the latter, if we observe a few renowned dictionaries, a common lexical field arises from the diverse definitions303, with a recurrence in words such as construction, assembly, fabricate, manufacture, components, sections, parts, standardization. That denotes there is an action occurring in space that is related with the idea of organizing and

122 building something. Moreover, there is a recurrence in the idea that there is some sort of process preceding a deployment on a final location, that is, it is set through a temporal notion (e.g. in expressions such as in advance, in factory, on site). From here, some preliminary conclusions on a definition could be taken, but another question arises as to the up to date validity of the dictionary entries. For instance, in Webster’s case, the definition was first recorded in 1932 and has not been changed since. Meanwhile, technology has progressed, yet the word apparently has not, and in that sense, it may be reasonable to think it can mean something different today. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the evolving context, the meaning of the word has essentially been kept304. Besides, since the first dictionary entry has only been recorded in 1932, that indicates a relative historical novelty of the term, and thus of an increased potential difficulty in a clear-cut definition. By word formation reasons, the closest word in its lexical relatives is fabrication305, which is suggestive of some way of elaborating materials with desired properties by using different techniques306. Assembling307, which is a closely related word, can easily be understood as means to join together308. Fabrication can also be defined as providing the elements that are to be assembled together. These definitions are obviously interrelated and precedence of one in relation to the other is often dubious. There is also the issue of hierarchy, that is, on how each stage of assembly can be defined and limit each sub-stage, which in turn leads to where fabrication and assembly start and end in relation to each other. The latter is a looping issue, as the boundaries between the means to fabricate and the means to assemble are not always clear. Anyhow, there is an implied subscription of a space-time notion, given if there is a certain stage, it implicitly means there is some other stage preceding or suc- ceeding it—the prefix pre309, agglutinated with fabrication is, if not more, a reminder of such. Therefore, prefabrication310 places the activity of fabrication before some reference point in time311. Although not consensual, the term prefabrication indicates a space-time reference to the overall processes of fabrication and assembly, and thus can be described as the putting together of all or part of an artifact in some place other than its final location312. From here on it is a matter of degree, although not free of ambiguity, as if applied to every factory-made product the term would eventually lose its meaning313. Following a British terminological tradition, Gibb314 apparently solves this question by naming it something different—i.e., off-site fabrication—but that also reduces its scope. For our purposes, in this regard we find suitable to distinguish between in-situ and ex-situ processes within a broader prefabrication terminology. As we will later observe, these also unambiguously fit the related conception of modularity. Another problem with this space-time definition is that it can seamlessly be adopted for different notions, as in industrialized construction or as in a definition of component, thus potentially generating other ambiguities. The industrialization of construction products should not be mistaken with prefabrication, although the themes can often mingle. Construction industrialization results of a continuous progress

123

made in the industry of intermediary construction products (i.e. those products that, when brought together, may or may not make part of a building). On the other hand, prefabrication can be regarded from the whole of the building and be thereon deconstructed into (or reconstructed through) its different systems and elements (components, sub-components, and so forth). Prefabrication should also not be mistaken as strictly the result of the hypothetical reduction of a building to a manufactured product. As far as we see it, it should be understood by the taking in action of the diversity of the building’s morphology and its relations and for the comprehension of the conception processes that give it shape. A building process cannot be reduced to an assembly sequence, as if it was a mere and unequivocal spreadsheet—in the least, the building construction is intrinsically exposed to more imponderables when compared with finished products exiting a controlled industrial assembly line. Construction is ought to adapt, or to be though off in terms of a wider set of risks and constraints, such as technology, site, weather, transport, and so forth, not to mention legal or regulatory aspects that can be present since early stages in the design. Therefore, a typical industrial product cannot be strictly compared with a building product. For instance, there is no packaging for a house, the package is the house, which makes it a very different kind of product—nevertheless, in business terms it can be considered as so, as in a real-estate product. Foremost, there is necessarily an issue of scope and/or scale, but also of perception. Indeed, technically, there is no possible consensus on a straightforward definition of prefabrication, and that in least indicates there is a relevant matter of [subjective] perception involved. If speaking, for instance, on prefabrication of houses or on prefabrication of bridges, it is a peaceful thing to say that different subjects are being mentioned, yet distinction might not be so easy in other cases. The two involve different scopes, notions, scales, skills, detailing levels, and so forth—in houses, we can commonly refer to prefabrication of houses; in bridges, the terminology can be, e.g., prefabrication of elements for bridge construction, instead of prefabrication of bridges, hence implying that prefabrication is assumed to be a part on a bigger process, not the whole process, as in houses. The same occurs in multi-story apartment buildings, where it is common to say that they have, e.g., prefabricated façades, or prefabricated modular components, although the building itself is not usually taken as prefabricated. Exceptions in specific literature are rare in this kind of buildings, nevertheless they can be found, as it is the case with the Murray Groove apartments in London (1999-2000), by Cartwright and Pickard. It thus follows that prefabrication is not a technical or scientific notion, but more a notion dependable on a certain agenda, or on how a building product is set to be sold, that is, on a public perception and how that perception is built up, with what intents, and so forth. In a way, and only if it matters for its promoter, we would also add that the closer the building is to a bondable entity, such as a packaged consumer product, the more likely it is for it to be called prefabricated. Likewise, a analogous

124

reasoning could inversely be applied to the multi-apartment, speculative real estate with no particularly perceptible use of construction components. Indeed, their essential difference in marketing terms is virtually inexistent. In any case, it is clear that architecture is not necessarily a core business in these specific perspectives. In houses, and particularly often in detached houses, the term is typically assumed as describing a whole, even if it is known that it is not totally so. This notion of meaning attributed to a whole instead of a stage of it, as it occurs in the notion of off-site fabrication, gets higher relevance when we think that prefabrication is frequently denoted in opposition to the so-called traditional construction. However, when referring to traditional construction we may also be meaning many different things, e.g.: to a specific enrooted technique; designating a certain vernacular type; or generally to a process we take for long established or that simply we are somewhat used to. Prefabrication can too mean many different things315. If in some of its uses, the term vernacular can be evocative of traditional316, analogously, prefabrication can be regarded as evocative of an architecture conveying a sort of feeling of vanguard related, cutting-edge (or so seeming) engineering or industrial practices. Regardless a greater or lesser propagandistic tone associated, the vanguard image it may convey can have a powerful appeal. How- ever, that may well backfire, symptomatizing an enrooted social suspicion related with biased past examples. Anyhow, prefabrication also renders an appeal, derived from a certain functionalist discourse, to notions such as efficiency and economy, associated with a better work environment and qualitative control via enhanced planning in the design, construction, costs, and so forth. These do not necessarily need to be regarded as cutting-edge, or as if alien-like relatively to ordinary practices. As palimpsest, knowledge and technology are iteratively devised, recursively summed and questioned in time. In the cases where its use is more reluctant, it should make sense to regard the potentials of prefabrication, incorporating it in current practices. Such does not occur overnight. It implies an entourage at the pervasive level of a constructive culture, and well-coordinated approaches from design to construction actors. At this level, prefabrication is already well established in the practices of places such as the USA, Japan or Scandinavian countries. In those places where such culture is not so vividly present, the approaches most likely require an extra effort in research, development and overall dialogue among players. In one case or the other, mitigation of social acceptability suspicion should likely be a major concern, as the low-quality examples throughout history have stigmatized the very term. In architectural practice, it is our belief that to overcome such suspicion, high-quality in design should interdependently correspond to high-quality in constructive solutions. Ethically in the least, both should in all cases be a permanent concern. Trying to reach a consensus in a prefabrication terminology is a task that most likely will reveal unfruitful, as the methods to classify often seem to be as varied as the purposes of those making the classifications317. For instance, the client is probably interested in size and price, along with style or

125 the like; the builder with productive quality, efficiency, revenues, and so on; and the architect will be concerned with design issues, such as the geometry of the building, functional organization, spatial qualities, and so forth. Being a general notion, prefabrication can be adjusted to the specific cases, with conventions of their own, in relation with the overall process that is under development.

126 2 FROM THE MODERNIST INDUSTRIAL PARADIGMS TO A NETWORKED REALITY

2.1 A business reality

Shipbuilding, aerospace and specially the automotive industry are perhaps the more direct inheritors of the coal and iron based Industrial Revolution times. Following mechanophiles such as the motorized suburban Frank Lloyd Wright, or the functional urban Le Corbusier, in the Modernist period these industries have often been discursively implied, whether symbolically/culturally or by their state-of-the-art production and management practices, as ways that architects should regard atten- tively. Hitherto, the literature related with prefabrication, and/or with systems construction, frequently borrows elements from these318. That hardly comes as a surprise, since the history of prefabricated construction, and generally, the technological evolution of construction processes has long been inextricably related with the development of other industries or businesses319. Attesting it, there are illustrious examples, such as the Portuguese Gaiola Pombalina building system, which was plausibly based in shipbuilding methods. In any case, it must not be forgotten that the building industry has its peculiarities that differ from those of other industries. That necessarily restricts attempts for a direct comparison, limiting the taking of early assumptions. Several reasons contribute for the terminologies, processes or practices used in industrial production and management to be ahead of those of the construction industry320. As a general decisive factor, that can be credited to their tendency of concentration of capital, which results in more resources available for R&D, marketing, and so forth. Moreover, unlike what it often occurs in the construction industry, these commonly follow product-driven philosophies, where capital availability has a vital effect in the engagement of the entire productive fabric to converge towards the underlying goals. Classically, this has led to conspicuous replication-engaged philosophies and methods. These arise as a natural consequence of unraveling efforts to attain economies of scale, by optimizing processes, reducing inefficiencies, self-regulating batch sizes, and so forth. Anyhow, currently the repetitive ste- reotypes of the production machine are very different from what they have been in the past. That can be illustrated by the IT’s propelled tendencies towards the integration of a higher range of consumer choice, seemingly increasing variability of outputs through mass-customization strategies and the like. Anyway, notwithstanding the divergence in philosophy or the improved tools or technological state, the replication-engaged processes are still in the bare bone of most production processes around a globalized world.

127

The purpose of achieving more effective, scalable modes of production is deeply engaged in gradually attempt to achieve more with less, which corresponds to an idea of progress and development where economy is prime, often at expense of the social and/or environmental spheres of a sustainability equation. From the standpoint of the underlying economic processes, there certainly are many similarities between these industries. In any case, there are also differences worth noting between their sizes and characteristics. As shown in Table 2, contemporarily the greatest of these is beyond doubt the automotive industry. Analyzing figures collected from the 2014 Forbes Global 2000321 list, excluding the banking industry (in first place) and the oil industry (in second), the automotive industry had the most companies on top. Focusing in the more traditional hard industries’ companies (i.e. construction, shipbuilding, aerospace or machinery), the sum of the auto industry top 10 companies’ was head-to-head with the remaining top 10 combined. In other words, this means that 50 companies among these other hard industries moved a business that was roughly equivalent to the business moved by the top 10 companies in the automotive industry. This portrays the difference in the business scales, and not least gives an idea of the plausible difficulty in establishing a comparison, or extracting sound features on fair grounds.

Top 10 Companies’ Summed Sales* Profits* Assets* Market Value* Construction Services 596.9 17.653 751.8 256.3 Construction Materials 218.7 8.019 328.4 179.8 Aerospace and Defense 369.8 23.161 451.9 424.7 Shipbuilding** 152.074 1.962 126.7 32.7 Heavy Equipment*** 231.1 15.17 326.8 246.5 Previous Combined**** 1568.57 65.965 1985.6 1140 Auto and Truck Manufacturers 1507.7 78.8 2101.3 859.6 * In USA$ Billion. ** Including Conglomerates, which also include aerospace, defense, energy, and so on. Excluding the ‘Profits’, ‘Assets’ and ‘Market’ of the Forbes’ 2000 unlisted - that is, the bottom 6 of Top 10 companies, anyhow of little relevance for the overall picture. *** Excluding Conglomerates that are included in Shipbuilding. **** For comparison purposes. Table 2. Sum of Top 10 Companies by industry in 2014, based on Forbes Global 2000 list.

Notwithstanding their differences, a bit all over, similar production features can be recognized among the diverse sectors. Henry Ford’s iconic linear assembly has long been replaced by the production of integrated modules, each composed by innumerous parts provided by different suppliers. From the initial assembly line, companies have gradually begun to use third-party manufacturers, not just as source of parts, but also for fabrication of subassemblies. Managers, designers or process engineers began to realize the advantage of fragmenting products, and developing them in modules, or sets of parts, where each module can be composed of many parts, preassembled off the main assembly plant, in an adjoining or nearby facility, or at a remote location. Although each case is a case, the general argument is that when these parts are fabricated into components before arrival at the point of final assembly, gains can be made in quality, features, or performance, while reductions can be achieved in cost and time of fabrication. The philosophy of

128

the process of making, from design to production thus tends to follow a parallel, networked logic, instead of a linear, gravity-like process motion, where the collective intelligence is put at work in collaborative processes towards integrated component construction. Our times are not those of the modernist age, when the comparison notably first arouse, and the production philosophies and methods have evolved to unprecedented sophistication. Notwithstand- ing, in many ways, it is our belief that the automotive, shipbuilding or aerospace industries are still largely valid as references for an assessment. Particularly, when comparing with other relevant industries such as the software, hardware, or services industries, the trio still seems to be the closest to establish a more useful evaluation. Surely, each with their own idiosyncrasies, surrounded of different challenges, and thus with potential of arising a variety of inputs towards the construction industry and/or the architectural production.

129 2.2 Notes from the automotive industry

In the modular and parallel assembly of car production, the supply chain is consolidated and hierarchically organized into a chain of tier suppliers, delivering modules for arrival at the OEM (original equipment manufacturer), the company that makes the final product for the consumer marketplace and thus bears a brand or multiple brand’s name. For instance, Volkswagen, Chrysler and Toyota are OEM companies that manufacture cars, and Apple, Sony or Samsung can be regarded as consumer electronics OEMs. The OEMs are, so to say, the companies that are on top of the food chain, and straight below is the so-labelled tier-1 companies, which are the direct and major modules suppliers to the OEMs, followed by tier-2, tier-3, or even tier-4 companies322. This product-focused ecosystem, hardwired to build successfully higher (i.e. bigger and/or more complex) levels of components, until reaching the final product ready to deliver to the consumer, requires transversally fine-tuned processes. With a modular functioning of the production methods, and a clarification of the interfaces in the final installation (e.g. with use of fewer joints, or following strict, practical rules of assembly), more precise tolerances can be attained throughout. Moreover, there can be an improvement of working conditions, with less accumulation of parts in the final assembly area, thus easing the entire process and minimizing the risk of flaws. Furthermore, with the fragmentation into modules build up by different tiers, there are more entities assuming primary responsibility for their quality and in-time delivery than in a classical command-and-control method of construction, thus contributing to streamline production and improve overall quality. Moreover, since production and accountability are spread across numerous players, focusing in design, engineering or systems’ management (also known as product architecture) is key for a successful integration of the various contributions. Following a fast-paced technological evolution, with the IT’s of our information age, parallelism can be implemented and manageable up to scales unthinkable until just a very few years ago. The focus on process integration, through the adding or improvement of processes and/or technologies such as digital modelling, virtual testing, fast prototyping, supply-chain management, or corporate in- house connectivity with vehicle platforms and the like, have enabled this industry to reduce even more the concept-to-market period. In the mid-1990s, a concept-to-market period could typically take 52-58 months, whereas in the mid-2000s it was estimated easily taking 32-38 months (about 40% less in a decade)323. Speeding up the process has been a key focus for the automotive industry, and that means billions in savings. Henry Ford’s linear paradigm, which we can symbolically ascribe to a motion of gravity and hierarchy, no longer dictates all processes. In a way, gravity has given place to the virtual, and its counterpart hierarchy has given place to the network.

130

From design to manufacture, every part, right down to the tiniest element, such as a screw, can be defined and digitally controlled on a process sheet that details all features and installation procedures. The entire process is poised to be controlled electronically through direct links among all participants, from the OEM to the suppliers (tier-1, tier-2, and so forth), and at last installed on the final assembly line. Quality control procedures help to insure minimization of flaws. For instance, discrete components are typically coded to enable instant tracking and to ensure that each is installed in correct positioning in the proper module or vehicle. Each module comes to the final assembly complete and ready to quickly be attached to the vehicle under construction. The various modules produced in parallel and trackable throughout the entire process, contribute to a drastic reduction of the overall time-to-market for the complete car. Moreover, these also enable client’s customization options to be seamlessly integrated in the process, as well as ease of component tracking for future maintenance purposes of repair or replacement. By optimizing the entire production chain, the time and total cost of labor required to install modules at the point of final assembly are poised to be dramatically reduced, as are the overall quantities and costs of material, and the total production time and cost of the final product. Additionally, from a suspension mechanism or an electrical socket, to a transmission or a differential system, an alternator, a chassis or an engine, or a set of several of these, through the concept of platforms, some modules are shared between different vehicle models of the same brand, or of different automotive brands or even brand holders, further contributing to the production economies324. These sharing processes also reflect a reality where, in a way and in many levels, the main differences between the end products may lay in what is more directly visible or tangible (e.g. bodywork, dashboard, alloy wheels), than in what lays beneath (e.g. chassis, engine, transmission, differential). Likewise, it is a reality where, aside the performance factors, a mix of aesthetics or tradition/meme carrying brand status plays a major role. Consciously or subconsciously this affects the feel of a car, aside its material quality or other more or less objective characteristics, with repercussions in the perception mechanisms forming the value, price-point, and so forth. As we have mentioned, the codification procedures are key for a seamless integration of production processes in this industry. For that matter, aside following international standardization and/or certification schemes, the very companies often develop their own norms—from the material properties, to classification of construction elements, from screws fixation force or pistons tolerance specs to larger modules’ joint tolerances, construction or management procedures, labor rules, and so forth. Additionally, regional or country specific aspects are also considered, from driver’s seat on left or right, to CO2 or NOx exhaustion norms, and so on, and thus though of to seamlessly be modularly integrated in the production. Management procedures, controlling and accounting, are thus key to keep these organizations well-oiled.

131 These procedures, engaged in the cogwheel of attaining ever-greater economic efficiency, reducing costs and increasing value to maximize revenues and the like, are obviously not exclusive of the automotive industry. For instance, in retail, companies such as Amazon or IKEA are well-known by the large public for their tight and detailed control. This are evident in Amazon’s logistic procedures, or in IKEA’s precise number of coded construction elements that are packed with their products.

132

2.3 Notes from the aerospace industry

As automobiles, commercial aircrafts are also the product of a highly efficient cooperation across a company’s global supply and manufacturing chains, often built upon decades of innovation in the field. Design and production of a car or of a jetliner pretty much go through analogous steps in terms of modular fabrication. However, the jetliner’s larger scale, added to the highly demanding air-safety requirements, make it a very different product, starting in the very organizational philosophy. Indeed, whereas in the automotive industry, the production and responsibility can more easily be fragmented into the different tier suppliers, in the aircraft industry, control typically stays closer to the hands of the main company, more in a command-and-control fashion. In cars, tier-1 suppliers are typically specialized in a certain kind of component, thus following more of a performance approach, which is set by the OEM. That is, using their specialized expertise, the tier-1 supplier conforms its product to the OEM’s design requirements, established in terms of performance goals, which include form factors (e.g. spatial/geometric characteristics, materials, joint locations, and so on) and function factors (e.g. structural, mechanical or electrical characteristics, and so on). In airplane production, given the nature and scale of the product, a performance approach cohabits with a detailing approach, where the different plants supplying the components for the entire airplane typically work in vertical integration under direct control of the main company, in constant dialogue with their design and engineering teams325. Thus, the concept of tier does not make so much sense here, since design and control is exerted throughout the entire line by the main company, without so much of fragmentation to third parties. Nonetheless, there are exceptions in particular dedicated components, such as jet engines, as it occurs with General Electric or Rolls-Royce, two well-known major aircraft engine manufacturers, with supply contracts with multiple aircraft manufacturing companies. Anyhow, the diverse individual plants under control of the main aircraft construction company, each typically specialize in certain parts of the aircraft and/or in the final assembly. Companies such as the European Airbus, the American Boeing or Lockheed Martin, are the top players in the industry326. Within their own business, these companies follow a philosophy of global cooperation that begins in the very design and engineering. For instance, Airbus327 relies on a network of facilities for design and engineering that spread throughout Europe, North America, India or China. Their headquarters in Toulouse, France, gathers competencies such as architecture integration, general design, structural design and computation, integration tests and systems, and propulsion, whereas, their facility in Filton, UK, produces and gathers design, engineering and support duties for wings, fuel systems and landing gear. To meet continued sturdy demand, and achieve high performance levels, in 2013, Airbus implemented a new production organization, focusing in further inte-

133

gration, full cross-functional alignment and even more teamwork in production activities. Structur- ally, the organization empowers each Airbus plant responsible for the corresponding components it manufactures, although there is a support by the overall design and engineering network to the day- to-day challenges. In the parallel assembly of airplanes, components sizes’ create logistical issues that the automotive industry typically does not face328. Regional synergies seem to be of importance for the company’s business strategy, both in terms of the economies of production costs, as of market implementation and visibility. Attesting it are the current final assembly line plants, which spread across several continents329.

134 2.4 Notes from the shipbuilding industry

The shipbuilding industry has too been modernizing over the past years, aided by the incorporation of digital tools that help integrating different stages of design and production. Shipbuilding production has long been following modular principles of construction. However, the heavy weight and large dimension of its parts, potentially the most extreme of any of these three industries, makes it a special case. Shipbuilding greatly relies in the brute force of cutting and welding of heavy steel elements, with much of the work occurring manually (even if machine-aided), in-situ or in shop, although with some parts produced in more controlled environments with support of CAM methods. There are also some highly-specialized parts, such as engines, propellers, or control mechanisms, which are typically supplied by third parties. Companies such as Caterpillar or MAN build heavy machinery and aside their own brand products, they also supply as third parties for ship construction330. This sort of companies is part of a grander ecosystem of businesses that we can relate with metal forgery and machining, spanning multiple areas, from auto or truck construction, to aircrafts or ships, as is the case of Rolls Royce, which produces cars, but also jet engines or maritime engines. The businesses of maritime building companies are also usually diversified, some of them moving through all sort of areas, in industrial conglomerate business structures, as is the case with the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), the largest of its kind, which works in areas such as aerospace, defense, energy, shipbuilding, and so forth. Finally, their procurement is of a very different character than for instance that of the automotive industry. The process of shipbuilding is very variable, facing all sorts of challenges, anyhow requiring robust production facilities. Indeed, ship construction can vary immensely according with the ship’s dimensions and/or characteristics. Smaller ships can almost entirely be assembled in a welding shop, and subsequently moved to a paint section, and thereon to the water. In large vessels, a great deal of the building blocks can arrive fully furnished to the final assembly site, which can typically be an outdoor dry dock, facing weather conditions. Smaller or larger, a vessel construction is typically grounded. This, allied to the variability of construction cases, makes it an industry that in this sense resembles more a building construction, than a car or airplane construction. Given the dimensions and the often-tight schedules, several specialized construction teams may be working simultaneously in different parts of the ship. Moreover, the dimensions and heavy weight of both the block modules, and the ships themselves, demands the brute force of the shipyards’ gigantic cranes and, if required, a transportation of parts through large specialized ships or land carriers. Given these intrinsic logistic limitations in maneuverability and transportability, the implementation of motioned and/or automated production lines is pretty much inhibited from a certain component scale onwards, and parallel production has more implementation constrains.

135 Generally, the building parts in ship construction are bulkier than in car or airplane, which makes its production harder to delocalize to external suppliers. Nonetheless, parallel production can be made possible overseas, and not only within a single shipyard. That is the case with the twenty Maersk’s Triple E container ships contracted for construction in 2011 to the Hyundai Heavy Industries - Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering (HHI-DSME). Despite the enormous size of the ship, the biggest of its kind, it is built with pinpoint precision, involving a massive international effort, from the design and engineering team, to the contractor teams and shipbuilding supervision331. South Korea has become the current world’s leading nation in shipbuilding, with several major companies operating from their shores. As most of the companies in the industry, the HHI’s activities, the largest of its kind after MHI conglomerate, are not limited to ship construction, ranging to other areas of heavy machinery. Among other things, they too produce engines and propellers, as well as some of the equipment to move heavy stuff, such as forklifts, cranes, and so forth. As the world’s biggest facility of its kind, with about 90 ships produced a year (one each 4 days), there are permanent concerns on the bottlenecks of the panel block assembly lines due to the limited facilities and equipment, the increase of construction demand or the simultaneous production of various types of ships. Aiming at obtaining a continuous flow production system, they thus constantly seek ways to mitigate bottlenecks, for instance, by minimizing incompatibilities in the labor days required by different parts, aiming at related components to be produced just-in-time on the construction sequence. Even with a well-oiled IT’s implementation, with automation, CNC cutting, CAD, CAM, and the like, the production process is nonetheless labor intensive. Therefore, a great effort must be set in addressing labor related issues, such as work safety or even in providing workers accommodation, for which they have even created a subsidiary housing division. Another major concern has to do with the integration of the diverse digital systems. Moreover, there is also concern set on the customers follow up, for which they have a maintenance and technical support division. Finally, there is an underlying synergetic philosophy pervading the company’s initiatives. As other companies in the field, HHI strives to increase their competitive edge in engineering, and they aim it through innovation. In 2015, a team of over 1,400 designers developed a more effective economical and eco-friendly ship design, responding to market changes and client demand, designing and engineering new ships for deep-sea environment in particular. In order to meet demanding quality and performance standards, they implemented a thoroughly quality management system for quality inspection of every manufacturing process. Apparently, the key to the performance improvement has been to aim towards a seamless, instantly updated information of the diverse concur- ring processes that directly or indirectly are implied in shipbuilding332.

136

2.5 Comparison and challenges towards housing production

Modernist mass house production gave answers that soon would be criticized. The techno-optimistic posture of some prominent figures, lead to appeals for architecture to proceed along a path with a closer regard to the industrial way. Nonetheless, comparisons with global industries such as the automotive, shipbuilding and aerospace, regarding their benchmark practices, although long observed and revisited from time to time333, have several aspects that can be questioned. Mass produced housing systems, developed to satisfy urgent housing needs, such as some postwar entrepreneurships, was typically limited in terms of spatial flexibility and technical refinement. It testifies a core difference between the automotive mass production and the analogous application to produce dwelling units. As Kenneth Frampton wrote, “[it has become clear] that the large amounts of capital necessary for the refinement of the automobile, from prototype to production stage, only becomes readily available because of the guaranteed marketability of the car as indispensable means of private transport. On the other hand unlike the automobile, that amortizes rapidly, the residential fabric, despite its seeming repetition, has a non-consumerist character”334. Indeed, the aspects of the financial architecture and its derived manifestations, is a core issue that should be present when comparing both realities. Additionally, in housing there is an attachment to a specific location, which can raise questions when considering the house as a product, whether the comparison is established with products of a greater (e.g. automobiles) or lesser (e.g. ships) consumerism degree. Indeed, the classical comparison, between house production and the industrial production paradigms, is not entirely fair thus it must be carefully considered. For instance, doing the exercise the other way around, it is difficult to imagine, for instance, how a car would be produced like a house335. For a start, there are issues related with the expected average lifespan, since it is hard to picture how a car can normally last more than 50 years as a house probably would. Typical house related questions, such as maintenance, how it could be altered and/or resized by the user, or easily expanded to take more people, are certainly very different. There is also a design issue, since cars take over 30 months to design, which ordinarily is simply not a bearable practice to proceed with a house design. It is also difficult to imagine how a car could be repainted or redecorated inside when owners get bored with the color, or how it could accommodate a wheelchair without significant modification, or even how it could look totally different from the other cars on the market at the same type and budget level. Finally, how could its business logic be sustained without the benefit of a consumerist cogwheel of built-in obsolescence, which also feeds the automotive industry, starting in Henry Ford’s philosophy of a car for everyone (beginning in its own workers), and ending in more sophisticated marketing schemes, from rentals to lease plans, fleet supply contracts to clientele companies, and so forth. Real-estate businesses can also be fiercely ag- gressive, anyhow the milieu is very different.

137 Buildings are made from many components, but these have different characteristics than those of other industries. Compared with others, most building industry components are relatively simple, not requiring a special technical sophistication in the in-situ works. Other industries are more likely to have complex components and sub-components, with specific differences in function and form, as it is the case of the engines in cars or airplanes. The organizational methods are too very different. It adds that the players in the automotive industry are typically much bigger when compared with most of the construction market players, with the bulk of the market composed of SMEs. The fact is that the automotive industry spends far more money on R&D than the building industry, which will inevitably reflect in the overall product quality and how that quality is managed and controlled, all the way from final assembly line to the diverse suppliers in the supply chain. Indeed, when producing units to the thousands, factors such as quality control acquire a determinant importance, since a flaw signifies tremendous losses to the OEM. On the other hand, the building industry has completely different opportunities, because the relative simplicity of building components allows a much greater diversity of outputs, which can be reflected in the appearance of the final product. Such apparent simplicity is also what ultimately empowers what can be called the culture of the home, that is, of taking care of the matters with the own hands, adapting spaces to different uses, decorating and the like, or through the non-particularly complex technical services of others. Although most components in building construction are relatively simple when compared with the complexity of others, the reality is that the supply of buildings can be more difficult. Moreover, for instance, in the automotive industry, although there are relatively complex components in different kinds of car models, of the same or of different brands, the essential parts can be pretty much the same. That, allied to a streamlined referencing of parts eases the ability to proceed with component substitution when needed, sometimes in a much more effective way than in housing. The numbered car parts are not only an effective mode for quality control, but also an invaluable source of tracking for replacement. Comparably, often when substitution of building components is required it is hard to find an exact replacer, although similar, but not exact ones may be available. Often product development or market trends render products obsolete in just a few years or, in other cases, companies simply cease to exist. For that matter, again, we need to recall that the bulk in the construction industry are SME’s, more prone to financial risk, although even bigger ones are not at all immune. On the one hand, the general simplicity of building components makes it more prone for repairing purposes. On the other hand, it can make it harder for replacement purposes. Alongside with more effective production methods, boosted by IT’s or more effective transportation methods, we have also been witnessing a concordant decline of craft, with repercussions in quality and cost. It is clear that with a decline of craft, quality and quantity are going to be achieved

138

by ever more rationalized and/or mechanized means, and where a focus must be put on systems’ management. It also seems clear that no matter how these will evolve, that knowledge integration will increasingly become a core issue for architectural production336. Meanwhile, several aspects of the industrial production can be borrowed to the architectural house production. For instance, making use of a philosophy of costumer first, following notions of economy and value demand, or making use of a communal patchwork philosophy, sharing design and responsibilities among the different parts involved. Moreover, the disciplines integration, as in process engineering, is a crucial issue, to which IT’s have a decisive say. Using new kinds of design regulating systems, through supply chain management, increased logistic performance, or segmented quality control, are possible successful ways to conquer such integration. Additionally, it can be relevant to implement information and simulation systems, such as online customer-oriented architectural survey to inform virtual simulation and general cost assessment. Finally, all this can benefit of integration with parametric design tools of Building Information Modelling (BIM), Bill of Materials (BOM) or Manufacturing Bill of Materials (MBOM), improving terrain integration, precise material definition, cost assessment, or generally the design workflow, while speeding up linkage to production. Further- more, lean production, mass customization, digital fabrication, material advancements, or addressing sustainability issues, among others337, can be looked as allies towards the evolution of the architectural production paradigms, where an awareness of technology should cohabit with an attention to the socio-cultural needs, redefining the quality of housing and living environment, locally and globally.

139 140 3 PREFABRICATION AND VARIABILITY

3.1 Logistics and output vectors

In prefabrication, it is primarily implied a distinction between locations where the building products are manufactured (i.e., ex-situ practices), and their assembly on the building site (i.e., in-situ practices). Logistics is the cement binding the two spheres, and is thus key for running any kind of building construction (prefab or not) smoothly and efficiently. Good logistic practices can bring positive impacts in several domains of architectural production, namely in aspects related with the output vectors of cost, time, quality and scope (Table 3). It is not only an issue of construction management, but an issue that should start with the very design.

Cost Capital cost (administrative, project fees, construction, financing, marketing, etc.) Maintenance cost

Time Designing and planning time Speed and duration of construction Speed of response to client’s needs

Quality Design reliability and durability Design innovation Subjective (aesthetical, spatial, impact in people, etc.)

Scope Functionality (suitability for the intended needs, in program intents, subjective qualities, etc.) Sustainability (economic viability, socio-cultural integration, environmental adequacy, etc.) Life-cycle behavior (suitability for the intended lifespan, flexibility, adaptability, etc.)

Table 3. A selection of output vectors.

Factory quality control levels are extremely hard, if not impossible, to attain in-situ with the same standards, namely because of the effects that non-dry construction processes can have in a convenient solidarization, finishing or waterproofing of the parts. Conversely, certain craft-depending qualities cannot be met in factory with the same standard as in-situ practices. Higher or lesser industrialized construction environments have different qualities, but also pose different challenges. In less industrialized construction environments, logistic pressure mainly occurs in the coordination of the integrated in-situ works, where things can get messy, often dealing simultaneously with raw materials, transportation, work coordination, besides weather conditions, and so forth. Com- pared to more industrialized environments, the management of the construction process has more dependencies, meaning that the mishandling of a single variable, can have downstream negative impacts in the output vectors. For instance, a delay in a craft can affect the integration of other works downstream, which may not be available for an alternative scheduling when ideally needed. On the other hand, more industrialized construction environments are more prone to alleviate in-situ logistic

141 pressure, fragmenting it elsewhere, thus contributing to attain potential gains in the output vectors. As direct consequence, comparatively there is a reduction of dependencies which carries many potential benefits. For instance, if reducing construction to the closest as possible of an assembly process, in-situ works can almost entirely be conducted by the same group of people, specialized in assembly, since more demanding specific crafts would be circumscribed upstream. Optimizing the separation of a building into its individual building elements, so that transportation can be optimized from ex-situ to in-situ, can be a decisive contribution to attain good logistic practices. Nonetheless logistic pressure will always be there, whether in higher or lesser industrialized environments, since components should anyway be delivered in the appropriate timings to avoid unnecessary time waste (e.g. arriving late, hence delaying the construction), or space waste (e.g. requiring unnecessary and expensive allocation of storage area). Especially on construction relaying on components in a greater degree, logistics must be precisely coordinated with the pace of the final assembly. Broadly, the higher degree of ex-situ work, the greater the influence of adequate logistics practices in what respects deployment aspects, i.e. in transportability and assembly. Furthermore, components can have all different kinds of sizes, shapes and/or complexity, the concurrent factors affecting construction logistics. For instance, in urban areas, particularly in the denser ones, additional constrains may arise due to traffic limitations, width of streets, or even trees, electrical or communication poles and cables, and so forth. Indeed, transport optimization is one of the key aspects of good logistics practices and may even influence design options, if costs are to be kept tightly under control. The conditions under which the building elements are to be transported is a factor that can seriously restrict the units’ size, as allowed transport dimensions should not be exceeded, otherwise requiring special transportation permit and/or more expensive transportation fees. Whatever the sort of transportation (e.g. truck, rail, boat, or even helicopter or airplane), it is imperative that the building elements are properly secured during transport and protected against possible damage en route, which may add some constraints to the transported unit characteristics. Normally, individual units can be combined to produce reasonable transport loads, optimizing the carrying338. For long-distance deliveries rail and sea transport can be economical solutions, but it should be remembered that the last stage of delivery to site must generally be made by truck. In that sense, multi-purposed carrying, such as containers or pallets are often a packaging device to consider, constraining dimensional considerations [complement with: Annex, II.3 Logistic Notes]. After transportation and arrival to site, to erect a building based on prefabricated elements, what mostly needs to be carried out on the building site is assembling and fitting. This includes hoisting, positioning, adjusting, connecting and waterproofing. Building work can thus become an assembly process, comparable with a factory production chain, although in different terms. For buildings made up of ex-situ built elements, the development of a jointing and connecting technique that guarantees

142 fast and simple assembly is of primal importance, as it is its exact coordination in time. Following gravity, the in-situ assembly of a building is typically a story by story horizontal process. To make sure everything is in clockwork, the position of the individual building elements should ideally be included in the design process. Additionally, the position, size and weight of the building elements are decisive in selecting the hoisting equipment339. To simplify positioning and to avoid later adjustment on site, the building elements should have reference and fitting surfaces, and additional equipment such as assembly and fitting guides can be helpful. Another major competitive issue in construction is the weight of labor hours. Moving labor from site to factory per se does not guarantee better overall output vectors. Construction requires labor hours, and these will occur whether in-situ or ex-situ. Nevertheless, it is clear that ex-situ work is more prone to labor replacement/assistance by machines, automation processes, and the like. How- ever, to increase automation requires an investment that involves substantial risks, which the producer may not be ready to assume. Moreover, as complexity and/or volume of components increases, it fades the cost-benefit of the implementation of automation processes, or even from the transportability of the construction elements. For instance, in Japan, where there is a great implementation of automation in house producing factories, their implementation is nonetheless low when compared with the automotive industry. Additionally, logistical difficulties in transport and site deployment also indicate that there must be a pondered balance between the degrees of automation ex-situ, and components’ complexity, which in business language is often described through the notion of batch- size340. Overall, this seems to point to potentially more gains in producing building elements that can feasibly be transported and require little finishing in-situ. However, some works are simply better done in-situ, namely water proofing or generally external finishing’s, otherwise increasing the risk of appearance of future construction pathologies, and so forth. In terms of production, broadly it seems reasonable to aspire replacing in-situ for ex-situ works, potentiating mechanization and/or releasing some types of logistic pressure. However, that may not suffice on its own. For instance, if variability is intended, tailor-made production cannot be entirely excluded. Partially manufactured products, or standardized manufactured products, require further processing in-situ, such as cutting, sawing or drilling, before they are ready to final assembly. To avoid it or reduce it, these ideally ought to be delivered in project-specific modes. Since stocking comes with a cost, the key is getting as close as possible to make just-in-time products. Thus, this will tend to pressure the delivering of project-specific elements and the accomplishing of a good logistical performance. An- yhow, there is no use to integrate efficient or economic construction practices if basic quality cannot be assured. Moving the construction process to a factory environment is not an end-in-itself. However, a conscious use of its potentialities can contribute towards a better overall behavior of the output vectors.

143 3.2 Mass-production and mass-customization

The well-known concept of mass-production (MP) marks an era in the modern age where machines indelibly settle in our lives, helping us to produce more with less human labor. In more recent times, it has been witnessed the arousal of the concept of mass-customization (MC). Industrial production processes, necessarily subjected to a business logic, traditionally have two main ways combinable to attain the desired profits: through economies of scale, producing large quantities at a relatively small price to maximize revenues; or through innovation, offering new products and thus creating new markets to obtain their revenues. With MC, is added a concomitant third way, which can essentially be described as attempting to address the client as directly as possible. In a saturated market as it is the global market, competition is fierce, and an edge can only be achieved by setting difference from competitors. In that respect, it is worth observing the classical psychological theory of Abraham Maslow, which sets a hierarchy of human needs, often illustrated in a pyramidal form341 (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Maslow's hierarchy of human needs.

Early Henry Ford’s assembly line followed a linear logic that was not limited to the production philosophy per se, but was subjected to a broader reflex of an understanding of the market as a linear system, exploiting the similarities between customers. However, people have different wishes and needs. Thus, at least theoretically, it makes sense to address the differences between people, instead of their similarities. Maslow’s is a humanistic logic of stimuli and reinforcements, or of unconscious instinctual impulses, whereas the production logic is one of mechanical forces. In a way, the market is where both these spheres meet. Hence, following an analogous hierarchical logic, from a marketing and advertising perspective it is on the upper levels of the pyramid that it is more worth to target the consumer, because it is there that most differentiation will theoretically be obtained. To attain it, the logic of competitors can no longer single-handedly be that of MP’s product push, where goods are produced in scale no matter what the end client is. Instead, a market pull strategy should be aspired, that is, ideally targeting consumers individually, from their seemingly needs and aspirations, which in practice will often work more in mixed push/pull way342.

144 With the arousal of the informational age, the pull logic became possible to address on a larger scale, since handling control of complex networked systems became somewhat an easier task. With it, it has aroused the concept of MC, coined by B. J. Pine II, in 1993343 [complement with: Annex, II.4 Mass-customization notes]. The MC, although settling on the same purposes of large production scales, is embedded of different purposes. Both MP and MC concepts are originally derived from the business language, aiming towards reducing production costs through the enactment of large production scales, yet the latter additionally seeks to answer the need that the industry has in delivering a diversified offer, targeting consumers in the most possibly direct fashion, enacting a seeming variety of outputs. Likewise, in the construction industry, the concept can be related with the purpose of delivering a range of formal or spatial outputs while ideally maintaining the same level of costs of large-scale production methods. However, business practice has shown that the implementation of a MC concept must be cautiously addressed and might not always be the best way forward. A key issue among companies operating in saturated markets is whether their yields can be kept when supplying customized products. As in any basic business strategy, there is an immanent issue of costs and revenues. Although with different logics and logistics, both MP and MC can have an important weight in this equation. Apparently, in a traditional scaled production, logistic costs will be more dissipated than in a customized production. That inevitably pressures the efficiency of the production chain. On the other hand, the logic of the client can be hard to predict. The client is tuned with the product via a process where choices must be made. It is a process of psychological nature, where desires or aspirations can arise from authentic need, but also be (un)consciously inculcated, where marketing may have a decisive role, or where may arise related issues of fashion, consumerism, and the like. When choice is engaged, and thus the production sphere meets the client sphere, from a production management perspective, we can translate it in terms of the order penetration point (OPP)344. As illustrated in Table 4, the OPP refers to the point in the production chain where the customer is engaged in his choice process, or equivalently, where customers’ orders are accepted by the manufacturer, and can broadly be set in four different categories, make-to-stock345 (broadly equivalent to MP), assemble-to-order346, make-to-order347, or engineer-to-order348 (the highest MC rank), to which correspond different logistical frames and different customization potentials.

Postponement Stage of Manufacture Strategy Design Fabrication Final Assembly Shipment Make-to-stock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OPP >>>>>>>>>>>>> Assemble-to-Order >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OPP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Make-to-Order >>>>>>>>>>>>> OPP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engineer-to-Order OPP>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>production scale >> >> scale >>production Table 4. OPP postponement strategies.

145 Another essential issue facing companies is whether overall productive performance, including economy and quality criteria, can be maintained when the products are customized. Again, logistics plays a major role in costs, which in large-scale industries delivering customized products can be so high, that at first hand traditional products will always be more competitive. Thus, it is natural that businesses seek different approaches to reverse the hazardous trends of logistic complexity. Anyhow, inefficiencies are not exclusive of logistic practices, nor of companies that offer product customization. On the other hand, while a concern on the economies is paramount, competitiveness cannot be attained without a strong focus on quality, and certainly not disregarding the relationship with the client. In management terms, it seems that the way to go from MP to MC must start by transversally eliminating inefficiencies and waste in the entire process from factory to delivery. Indeed, any MC strategy is necessarily ought to be settled on lean thinking (LT) approaches349, a business jargon for strategies that aim at an optimization of the production and delivery processes, crossing the entire production chain to produce better and more with less. Built on the Toyota Production System (TPS) basis, LT350 is a business methodology that fundamentally seeks to ways to mitigate muda351, a Japa- nese word that roughly means waste and can refer to any human related process that absorbs resources without creating value. Thus, in a LT approach, every muda that uses resources for any objective other than the creation of value to the end-customer is targeted for elimination. LT thus settles on the continuous processes of improvement and is centered in the preservation of value with less work, by means of more efficient and optimized processes, waste reduction, empirical methods for decision making other than uncritical acceptance of pre-established ideas. This way, using LT processes, businesses can be set to provide ways to do more with less and less, with the aim of providing the clients what they want. From an architectural point of view, the Miesian aesthetical statement of “less is more” can here be regarded under an economical flagship, transformed into more with less. The difference is far from subtle. Indeed, it can raise fundamental questions on production and on architectural design, as the natural, sustainable ways, of making in the exact right measure (of aspirations, needs, resources, and so forth) becomes a clearer understatement. We should not forget these concepts derive from a business language, and for that matter, more with less means more with less human effort, less equipment, less time, less space, or even less quality. To our belief, these aspects should not only be regarded only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. Moreover, we must not forget that in architecture there is a wider range of concerns involved, located beyond a typical business perspective. The critical starting point for LT is value, which can only be defined by the client, and which is only meaningful when expressed in terms of a specific product which meets the client’s needs at a certain price and time. The value is made by the producer, and from the client’s perspective, in brief,

146 this is why producers exist. However, often the investor pressure and the financial mind-set of the management and administration precede the basic realities of specifying and creating value for the client. Thus, there is the issue of the vectors of value, and of who specifies this and that for what, and so forth. As in a LT philosophy, in MC continuous improvement is a requirement. However, unlike LT, in MC are also required quite different organizational structures, different values, management and systems roles, learning methods and especially ways of relating with the client. The product and its development are not commanding, but instead the client’s desires and demands. Therefore, is not just about being better and working better as a team with a common purpose. From a developer’s perspective, it is also about accepting the unpredictable nature of the client, considering him as an opportunity, not an obstacle. Thus, it is about getting the best possible method to relate every participant within the context and the circumstances of each case. In architecture, this should not be news, as most of the times the architect answers directly to the client’s demands. However, given the nature of the architectural production, this is normally made case by case, without a methodology of the kind required by a large productive structure. The additional requirements of MC in relation to LT have been illustrated in several circumstances, namely in the Toyota case. Indeed, despite the TPS success, and as any other competitive company on the path innovation and success, at a certain point, Toyota aspired for more, and thus attempted to follow a MC path. The company’s vast experience, and the valuable, and acclaimed background, were indicators that the approach had everything to succeed. However, results would prove disappointing, and the obvious consequence was to remake the adopted MC philosophy352. In the least, this can be viewed as a warning sign on the difficulties to introduce MC in any business.

147 3.3 Notes towards variability in prefabrication of houses

Figure 5. Customization vs standardization.

If we consider a simplified scheme as shown in Figure 5, moving from the less customized to the most customized product, and differentiating three stages of this movement onto the categories production, semi-custom and custom, then we would find these in the intersection of an inverse movement from more industrialized, to less industrialized approaches. Translating it to a typical house production approach, this means that as the industrialization level decreases in each of these, the customization level, design flexibility and, consequently the cost and overall construction time increase. In a MC implementation, we would ideally be able to invert this logic, thus increasing industrialization level while increasing the customization level. We could also scale MC in terms of OPP, which in a traditional client-architect relation will be at its lowest level, with the least postponement occurring, and where everything is possible within the constraints (budget, location, and so forth). It follows an equivalent of an engineer-to-order fashion, where production concerns only arise afterward, typically with a contractor hired to follow the design specifications. Conversely, in a purely speculative design, the postponement reaches its highest degree, in a make-to-stock relation typical of MP. Finally, we can also observe an MC process through the relations established by the main active forces participating in the construction, considering the client, the designer and producer. Depending on the sophistication, there would be other possible subdivisions, with intervenient acting in more specific roles, e.g. in the designer sphere, architects or engineers can be included, or in the producer sphere, we can name the developer, (sub)contractor, and perhaps it could also be included the marketing sphere, and so forth. From the point of view of architectural production, the client-architect relationship likely corresponds to the least design constraints and more production variables, whereas the client-producer possibly to the most design constraints coming both from design and production demands, and finally the architect-producer to a stronger focus in production optimization. When we

148

Actors Client Producer Designer

Constraints General Political Regulatory/Legal Bureaucratic Economical/Financial Socio-cultural Environmental Project Urban Architectural Structural Thermal Services and their weight (Electrical, Plumbing, HVAC, etc.) Acoustic Sustainability Construction Technological environment Availability and quality of builders Availability of materials, components or equipment, etc. Labor cost / Productivity

Project Type Size Flexibility Adaptability Complexity Discreteness Integration of different design expertise Integration of design and construction Construction methods Degree of innovative technology involvement Aesthetics Table 5. A selection of factors with potential greater impact in the architectural production. start mixing the actors, in a threefold client-designer-producer relationship, we get into a sort of grey area, where MC strategies may act and less traditional design modes of action take place. Regardless the approach, several circumstances can arise from the timespan going from the client decision to build a house to the point where it is concluded, making it harder to establish a predictable outcome, for instance from the budget point of view. Among the changing factors, it can be included imponderables, such as natural hazards or political/regulatory changes, but not least important, the client may simply change opinion. The latter risk is perhaps the most difficult, if not virtually impossible to assess353 (Table 5). The purpose of variability in a more or less systematized, more or less prefabricated building conception is naturally related with a need to meet the clients’ desires while maintaining a certain effectiveness of the building production methods. It is unlikely that clients ask for everything to change during construction. However, in a fiercely competitive market, where a prospective buyer has multiple options to choose from, the developer must be ready to implement changes when requested, and in this sense, a discrete approach to design and construction is mandatory. Production in the building industry follows both ex-situ and in-situ practices. In a normal scenario in other industries, site works would correspond to the final assembly stage in an OPP chart. How- ever, even in highly industrialized construction, final assembly in building construction typically has a great overall weight, with very particular dynamics, and with a site-related unpredictability that is

149 necessarily greater than in a factory final assembly mode. Furthermore, clients often change decisions during the site construction. Thus, ultimately, it could even make sense to distinguish two related OPPs in the building construction process, one before and another during the site works. At first hand, one may think that if the OPP would be exclusively conducted in factory, then the only change for the client to participate in the choice process would be in the design stage. However, many of the construction industry components have a remarkable degree of project independence, assuring greater freedom. In some, not only with the looks, but also with the very dimensions can be easily adaptable to a sudden change in requirements through relatively inexpensive processes of cutting, drilling, and so forth. Among the project independent components that in principle may allow a broader range of freedom, in different finishing and/or with adjustable sizes, we can find e.g. the windows (e.g. frames, glasses), kitchen equipment (e.g. furniture, appliances), door components (e.g. door, handles, hinges), sanitary equipment (e.g. in ceramic or plastic, taps), or electrical terminals (e.g. switches, sockets, sensors). Anyhow, some systems will inevitably have a deeper constraining impact than others. We can even easily change the sanitary equipment, but normally it will be a lot harder to change the piping where the sanitary equipment connects, not to mention the primary structure or the foundations. To enable the shifting of options in-situ requires investment in discrete elements, and that depends on several factors, such as the cost, the state of technology, the willingness of developers to take risks, the strategy adopted by the different participants in the building process, the project size, or more or less clear aesthetical intentions/expectations. Moreover, the nature of the construction industry potentially allows the consumer a greater range of options than in ordinary industrially made products. Finally, the variability intents must take in consideration the client’s options that are to be allowed to be produced ex-situ or in-situ. To increase variability, certain OPP postponement strategies can be implemented, not necessarily requiring greatly sophisticated processes or techniques. Acting on a grander volumetric level, pressure is set on the design to meet eventual layout changes without burdening the production of construction parts. The morphological variability that acts on a larger volumetric level can be obtained with relative ease by hardwiring similarity principles in the design, which will act primarily at a typological level, but that necessarily will have implications in more detailed construction levels. For instance, by repeating a standardized product using straightforward geometric operations—e.g. rotating or translating—a considerable spatial variability can be attained with relative reduction of production impacts—by retaining an object’s symmetry, production gains scale, while outputs can attain variability. Furthermore, the use of such operators eases the CAD generation of variants, with gains in design productivity, to which may be added the use of systematized detailing or even the handling of design libraries and the like. By hardwiring morphological variability through simple geometric operators,

150

designers can act on a grander-scale postponement, enabling customers’ decisions to a later-stage, while also theoretically enabling to comply with local regulations beforehand. In lower levels of constructive action, both in new buildings and refurbishment market, variability range of outputs can also be increased without considerable extra efforts, by considering vectors of action such as the standardization of connections, while allowing dimensional flexibility, and the definition of the scope in which a layout can vary. In certain cases, stock products can themselves provide variability, serving postponement intents. For instance, in a façade, a catalogue of components with different dimensions can suffice to attain a reasonable number of variables by exclusively making use of standardized components, and thus can work on its own as an effective strategy. If to do this, we add flexible automated production (e.g. through CNC or 3D printing) or flexible dimension products (e.g. cutting window frame to desired size), we can drastically increase the overall variability without significant extra burden, while keeping the production postponement in later stages. If the plausibly more sophisticated (and likely more expensive) flexible automated production is not possible to implement, then variability intents can, in the least, be attained through a balanced mix of standard and custom-made components through the other previously referred strategies that essentially rely on principles of similarity. Piping and wiring systems have increasingly become the major constraints of the design options. For aesthetical, technical or even legal reasons, the flexible solutions employed in the industrial or commercial buildings are typically less feasible and/or too expensive to implement in ordinary house construction. In industrial or commercial buildings, flexible solutions can typically be attained by the greater ceiling heights, which are normally both a legal requisite and an effective need. Moreover, depending on the requirements and/or design philosophy, these can go from fully visible—typically of easier maintenance—to concealed installations through suspended ceilings or raised floors. In house construction, these strategies are simply harder to attain. It can also be added to this discussion the issue of the energy efficiency in buildings, particularly the unavoidable fact of the consequences that poor or non-existent passive design strategies can bring to the installations, increasing their spatial weight, further constraining the design options. Indeed, the growing energy efficiency requirements in buildings increases pressure in this particular, and it may not be easy to take properly informed design decisions. For instance, it is generally accepted that considerable energy savings can be achieved through airtight construction, using materials with good insulation characteristics. However, this can too have its inconveniences, which can be particularly more noticeable in low-thermal mass constructions, requiring temperature and ventilation control equipment. If applied in house construction, such equipment can too reach a remarkable complexity, comparable to what occurs in other building types (e.g. commercial or industrial). Although there are already quite remarkable advances in electronic and digital integration through domotic devices, with

151 sophisticated protocols and the like, the fact is that the user is not always willing/financially capable to adopt them. These not only can have considerable associated costs that simply may not present visible yields, but also the user can be suspicious of more complex paraphernalia. A typical conscious user may likely want things to be kept ease, and the more complex piping or wiring becomes, the likely the customer will be suspicious that it will be harder to maintain or repair in the long run.

152

4 MODULARITY

4.1 A modularity context

Modules and modularity terminology has been profusely established354, namely among production and manufacturing management355 or mechanical engineering356 circles, but we can also find some of its founding concepts developed in architectural literature357. Its generalization can be assigned to discrete mathematics358, which deals with discontinuous objects, often characterized by integers (e.g. logic, set theory, combinatorics, probability, graph theory, Boolean algebra), in opposition to continuous processes, with objects that vary ‘smoothly’, dealing with real or complex numbers (e.g. calculus, analysis, linear algebra). In its applied dimension in construction processes, modularity is often taken as key towards efficient, industrially-driven construction practices. In a broad sense, it reflects an aim to use resources efficiently when several tasks pend for a solution, or a series of products are to be produced. It can be regarded as a structuring principle in service of an enhanced clarity, complexity reduction, flexibility enablement, or by facilitating the implementation of parallel work and independent problem- solving. In a customization context, modularization thus comes as a requisite towards attaining variability while rationalizing production. In the design of complex products, it is a key concept, namely in mapping functional and physical components of a product, as well as its interactions and depend- encies359. It can be applied in the areas of product design, in production management, or as a conceptual resource towards design. Depending on the scope, a module can be referred to as many different things. In architecture, it has traditionally been associated with spatial coordination aspects, such as in so-called modular coordination or modular grids. In building construction, a module is also often referred to as component. In this field, the component terminology can be relevant insofar as it avoids eventual connotations with so- called modular construction, which has been typically associated with construction using larger volumetric units, often with the size of an entire room. In a broader sense of construction, from building cars or ships to mechatronics, and so forth, the word component is also commonly used. For many of our arguments here, particularly those dealing with a physical notion of modules and modularity, we can regard component as a distinct region of a product, i.e., a discrete physical part or sub-assembly. In this sense, the use of a component terminology may help to disambiguate the notion of module, and we can use instead a component modularity terminology, where moreover it is implied that there can be different degrees of modularity. In non-physical notions, such as in software, modules are typically used from an unambiguously discrete perspective, thus the notion of module may probably be what best fits in those cases.

153

4.2 Defining modules and modularity

4.2.1 A SYSTEM’S PERSPECTIVE Architecture’s scope and architectural production modes are typically distinct in many ways from product manufacturing, which can raise difficulties when using concepts from this literature. Any- how, some of the analogies occur in aspects such as those we have addressed in the taxonomical landscapes chapter, through notions such as system, type or by acknowledging discrete vs kin perspectives. Also from there, we have that notions comparable to modularity, such as system or type, are intrinsically relative. That is, they depend on the scope or scale of observation. Furthermore, as we have earlier described, we can characterize a system by S={t, a, r, e}, with ‘S’ standing for system; ‘t’ for things, ‘a’ for attributes; ‘r’ for relations; and ‘e’ for environment. This is also what essentially occurs in modularity, with exception for a few shifts in the terminology, where things are equivalent to modules (or components), attributes to functional elements, and relations portrayed in the notion of interface. Also from a systems perspective, we can regard modularity as a continuum describing the degree to which we can separate and rejoin the components of a system. For clarity purposes (see Figure 6), here we can convention the scope as a product, which is set under a production-chain, and is the outcome of a work process within a given scope. In a different scope, a product can be regarded as a module of a different product, and so forth. Two or more modules combined form a product, which can be an outcome on its own or be a part of a product set (i.e. the system, which can be a product/design system). Finally, if we theoretically removed the scope pre-condition, we could say that a module or a product are conceptually equivalent, and thus tautological. In practice, the scope must always be there as a pre-condition, or primary constraint of the scrutiny.

Figure 6. Modularity.

154

4.2.2 TYPES OF MODULARITY Modularity has been typified in five different approaches: (a) Sectional—when different components of a modular architecture can connect in any arbitrary way, as long as if connected to one another through standard interfaces. A classic example are the Lego blocks. In building construction, that can be the case with standardized office partitions, ranging from open-spaces to different configurations of partitioned spaces. (b) Component Swapping/Sharing—the component swapping is when different product variants, within the same product-set, are created by combining a basic module with alternative components. A classic example can be an assortment of different cases (colored, textured, and so forth) that fit in a specific mobile-phone. In building construction, an example can be two houses distinguished only by their external coating. On the other hand, component sharing is when different product variants are created by sharing a basic component with different modules. It is thus complementary to component swapping, the difference standing in how a basic product, component or module are defined in a specific situation. A classic example can be automotive wheels, batteries or engines. In building construction, an example can be a standardized door used in different houses. (c) Cut-to-Fit—when one or more standard components are used with a variety of additional components. A classic example can be when two standard connectors can be used in different cable lengths. In building construction, an example can be hinges and handles combined in cut-to-fit windows. (d) Bus—it is when a module can be matched with a range of basic components, allowing their location and number to vary. A classic example is the computer hardware architecture, where moth- erboard slots allow the attachment of a range of different interface compatible components. In building construction, one example can be lowering the ceiling or elevating the floor, thus creating a bus where

Figure 7. Types of modular architecture.

155 different infrastructures can be implemented and thus also easing the change/addition of different terminals (lights, HVAC equipment, sensors, and so forth). (e) Mix—when a product results from different components that cannot be returned to their original state after being assembled together, that is, it occurs when there is a mix of substances. A typical example is color mixing. In non-dry building construction methods, it has a very common occurrence. It is in the extreme of what can be considered modularity, once assembled it is permanently coupled.

4.2.3 FUNCTIONAL MAPPING As shown in Figure 8, modules can broadly be described by two main characteristics: a self-contained functionality and an interface. The self-contained functionality is what is in the component, what is it supposed to do within the considered scope. The interface is what enables interaction, or relational engagement between different modules. Both the self-contained functionality and interface require a certain degree of correspondence between a physical and a functional realm, as well as an establishment of interactions between modules. That is, a mapping must occur between these two spheres.

Figure 8. Module.

If we define a function as what describes what a product does360, unlike what are its physical features, we can regard it in terms of functional elements and of a map (or set) of these in a function element of a higher degree (see Figure 9). For instance, at a most general level of abstraction the function set for a house might be a single functional element—e.g. provide a place to live. In more detail, the function set may be specified as consisting of a broader set of functional elements, such as: protect from the weather elements, provide thermal, air, light or visual comfort, but also establish an urban relation, and so forth. Each of these outcomes (the functional elements) in a scale, can be the starting point of a new function set. As we increase detail, the function set symbolizes more assumptions about the physical working principles on which the product is based. Because of it, two products that at a higher set level do the same, may have different function elements when detailed. In the final step, we need to map the functional elements to the physical components of the product. Following a similar logic, we can observe a discrete physical product as a set of at least one physical component. The set of physical components is what implements the functional elements to the product. In other words, the set of physical components, corresponds to the last functional set stage within the considered

156 Figure 9. Example of a functional mapping of a window, from function set to a component mapping. scope (see Figure 9). Throughout the process, we can map sets in a one-to-one, one-to-many or many- to-one fashion. A one-to-one means a direct correspondence, thus meaning a strict component modularity within the considered scope (e.g. motion mechanism on Figure 9). Conversely, a one-to-many or many- to-one (we can also name both together as non-one-to-one) indicates a certain dependency, making components non-strictly modular within the considered scope (e.g. locking mechanism on Figure 9). A function set can thus also be viewed as a non-one-to-one mapping process.

4.2.4 INTERFACES In a physical module is not enough to consider geometrical, mechanical or material characteristics alone, as it typically occurs, particularly with the first two, in the field of modular coordination361, or as observed in several traditions in the architectural field, as the Japanese tatami, based on the ken measure362. Indeed, generically the relations between modules can be described in terms of space (e.g. geometry, positioning), forces (e.g. mechanical, structural), material, energy (e.g. electrical current, heat) and/or information (e.g. radio waves), often with several of these simultaneously. An interface can thus be

157 Figure 10. Interfaces in a graph representation.

Figure 11. Example of a light switch modularity. viewed as a set of at least one physical part that is integral to the module, where each physical part in the set establishes at least one of these relations. Moreover, depending on the characteristics, an interface can be described in terms of input and output, and these can have different degrees of activity. For instance, a light switch establishes a spatial/mechanical relation with its physical support on the wall, but also an energy relation with the wires that connect with it, and eventually also an information relation if too connected to a home automation system. The input or output activities in relation to the spatial/mechanical support is of rare or irrelevant occurrence, hence of static interface. On the other hand, it is designed for switching on/off, which are relations of an input/output type. Indeed, within the scope of an analysis, the module’s interface can be several physical and functional things simultaneously. In this sense, complex products can typically be regarded as a network of components that shares interfaces in order to function as a whole363, which makes the handling of interfaces a key issue in the establishing of a modular architecture or in managing modularity. As we have stated, interfaces may involve different kinds of connections. For instance, a wireless router does not establish a mechanical connection with a computer. Anyhow, it is essential to assure compatibility in the interfaces of the set of components that are to be related with one another. That can be achieved by establishing standard protocols, which may be developed with Universal intents, as in the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) standards cases, or for instance developed internally within a company product-line, although in that case it may not necessarily follow an external standard. At first hand, many building construction components seem to have little or no relevant considerations to be made in regard to input or output, as they stand still in space, mechanically attached to one another, with adirectional (or static) relations. Anyway, external inputs such air for ventilation, or as solar light and heat can have a profound influence in design considerations. For instance, in deciding glass areas, or the use of architectural passive shading elements. At a services level, this becomes more evident, for instance in

158 respect to the placement of air input for sanitary ventilation, or the inputs/outputs of a water heating cycle in a home, and so forth. In any case, regardless input/output features, even for bulkier parts of the construction, establishing clear interfaces is key to proactively solar light and heat can have a profound influence in design considerations. For instance, in deciding safeguard modularity implementation where intended.

4.2.5 COUPLING AND DECOUPLING A module (e.g. a door handle) can be described as a relative property of a product (e.g. a window), and this conversely as a module of another product (e.g. a house). In this sense, a module is opposed to an integral structure, meaning that in it, only a fraction of the entire functions of a product will be implemented. On the other hand, in the product, the functionality is integral regarding the product’s scope as so-considered. When a product results from a modular architecture, it is equivalent to say that it occurs a one-to- one mapping from functional elements in the function set to the physical elements of the product, and thus that decoupled interfaces are established between components—i.e. a discrete approach. Conversely, in an integral product architecture it is included a complex, non one-to-one mapping, where coupled interfaces are established—i.e. a kin (or continuous) approach. Finally, again, whether the mapping is more kin or more discrete, that is, whether functional elements map in one or more channels, ultimately depends on the scope of the approach. Ultimately, considering the universe of manufactured parts, any component can be mapped to a one- to-one precision considering components stripped down to each individual part—call it i part. Broadly, of the i parts establishes a one-to-one mapping between these components and their functional set, then the product displays the one-to-one characteristic of modularity364. Two components are coupled if a change in one requires the other to change in order not to affect the product functionality. The mapping possibilities for this scenario are non-one-to-one. In a decoupled

Figure 12. Unlike in a decoupled interface (b), in a coupled interface (a) a change in A implies a change in B and vice-versa.

159 scenario, the mapping will be one-to-one. However, since components have an interface, theoretically they would always have to be coupled to a certain degree, since a change in one interface will imply a change in the other interface, thus in the components from where the interfaces emanate from in the first place. In practice, this may only become relevant as the interface gains complexity. As this complexity increases, the coupling vs decoupling distinction becomes useless, since there will always be some degree of dependency between the elements. Indeed, we can simply regard the decoupling as the special case of coupling where we can attain a strict modularity, as so considered from a given scope.

4.2.6 MEASURES OF MODULARITY The modular architecture can be defined on how the combinations of different modules are set for a certain purpose in a modularity development context. In literature, the notion arguably starts with Alexander365, in a description of the design process that involves the discretization of designs into minimally coupled groups. Meanwhile, the concept has been further developed to a perspective where complex systems can be viewed as hierarchical structures made up of quasi decomposable systems, such that strong interfaces occur within systems and weak interfaces occur across systems366. The latter seems to be consistent with the notions of mapping functional and physical structures, as with the underlying rationale in measuring modularity. In general, products are hardly strictly modular or integral. Instead, it is more correct to say that they display more or less modularity than comparative ones. Likewise, some construction components are more clearly acknowledgeable as modules than others. It thus also matters to observe how modularity can be measured, capturing modular architecture in terms of components dependencies. The decoupling of components offers a preliminary insight, in which the more decoupled the component of a product or system, the more modular will be the product or system. This integrates the one-to-one or non-one-to-one mapping concepts. However, when developing complex products, this relatively simple and useful notions may fail short. Literature in this particular has borrowed concepts from other fields, namely from social networks theory and graph theory. From it, it is essentially retained the concept of centrality, which aims to identify the most important actors in a social network based on their social interactions. Eventually the concept has converged in three types of centrality: degree, closeness and betweeness367. The graph theory has contributed towards a synthesis of the network aspects, providing a common ground to represent network attributes and mathematical structures with which these can be measured (Figure 13)368. Extending the graph rationale to a product decomposition, the component modularity can be defined as the level of independence of a component in relation to other components in a product. That is, we can assume that the more connected to other components, the more dependent, thus integral it is (Figure 14b). Conversely, the more disconnected a component is, the more modular it is

160 Figure 13. Graph fundamentals.

(Figure 14c). This is fundamentally consistent with the notion of functional mapping. We can further generalize it through a star graph (e.g. Figure 14b), where we can assume that the more connected and/or central the components are, (1) the more direct connectivity to all others, (2) the closest to all others, and (3) the more in between to any two others it will be. This generalization has been useful because components are not only directly connected to others, but their dependencies may propagate (via unidirectional or bidirectional bonds) to other distant components via intermediary components, or they can serve as intermediaries connecting others.

161 Figure 14. Graph representation of a hypothetical product decomposition and isolated observation of two of its sub-components.

Building up on these concepts, literature has defined component modularity threefold, in terms of: design dependencies, degree modularity and bridge modularity369. The design dependencies have been defined in terms of types (spatial, structural, material, energy, and information), and in terms of strength, that is, the direct bonds intermediating a component i and a component j, on which i depends on for functionality. The correlated degree modularity of a component is established by its dependencies, considering both direction and strength. The degree modularity in a component i, will be a normalized measure, based on the inverse of the sum of the number of other components that i depends on for functionality (in-degree), with the number of other components that depend on the i component for functioning (out-degree). The minimum value will occur when a component has strong dependencies with all other components in the product. The maximum when it is not connected with any other. The distance modularity has been defined in relation to the distance a component i is from all other components in the product, where the more distant a component is from the others, the more its design dependencies must propagate, and thus the more modular the component is. Formally, it is proportional to the sum of the geodesics of the component with all the other components. Thus, in its simplest form depends on the direction but not the strength of the dependencies. A high value means that the component is far from the others, thus more modular. As to the bridge modularity, it has been defined in terms of the integral degree of a component in relation to the connections it establishes with other integral components. The greater the number of links to other integral components, the likely more integral the component is, thus less modular, and vice-versa. Therefore, even if a component has few links to other components, if the others have a very low modularity, the component modularity is also expected to be low.

162 These are complementary approaches, which require different insights, and can help analyze different issues. Nonetheless, both share an underlying argument that components are more modular, the more independent they are from other components and vice-versa.

4.2.7 AN EXAMPLE As we have seen, when analyzing component modularity, we have to observe not only the types of bonds (spatial, structural, material, energy, information) but also their relative strengths. Analyti- cally, we can start by addressing the product-scope needs as potential constraints on all product components, thus assuring these are found in the functional mapping definitions. In design terms, we can not only depart from previously known constraints, but also embed eventual new product-scope needs within a virtual mapping, thus establishing different constraints towards design and development of the product. The first step in a modular analysis is to attain a functional description of the elements within the scope. In our main example, a product window (Figure 15), we can begin by describing what are its main functions, from where we could conclude: (1) separating interior from exterior, while letting light through, and (2) may open/close. This means that, to some degree, it must somewhat be a water/air/thermal/acoustic barrier, while facilitating light exchange. Moreover, it means it should imply a motion and a motion locking device. The first is a consideration that emanates from spatial aspects, namely from the interior/exterior distinction, whereas the second is essentially mechanical. The first kind inevitably leads to a multidi- mensional description of the module abilities to meet some physical and material properties. How- ever, since those considerations affect all components, it would be inconclusive, thus irrelevant for a modular analysis. Thus, the approach should not be posed as on what components can do, because they intrinsically may do many things simultaneously, but on what are the truly structing functions of each component, stripped of all other functions that could not be assigned without these. That is, the approach should start by hierarchizing the possible functions of each component within the module, through a functional mapping (Figure 9). In the next step, we can begin to describe how the relations between components are established (Figure 16). The first thing we can observe in a higher scope is that in the components of our product follow a cycle pattern, thus indicating a chain dependency of the diverse parts. We can also observe that the window is physically linked with its close environment (a11-wall and a12-floor), and has variable environment conditions (inputs) in the actions that can lead to the opening or closing of the window (rotate the a8-handle, push pull the a8-handle or push/pull the b2-movable sheet). The relations that the

163 Figure 15. The module window example-case.

Figure 16. A graph representation of two different levels of functional components of a window.

164 window establishes with these two environment sets is what primarily defines its interface features as a module within a higher product-scope (e.g. a house). When we zoom in, lowering the scope, we see that the a3-frame b in the b2-movable sheet establishes numerous connections in a kind of separate island, aside the main cycle. The island indicates an independence of the other b2-movable sheet components in relation to the main function of the module—indeed, the window could open/close just with the frame and nothing more. On the other hand, the numerous connections established with a3-frame b indicates a certain integrality of this component and/or a higher relevance within the overall system-window. Anyhow, regarding the window from a product perspective, we see that we can reduce its observation to a main relation with its direct physical environment, thus making it strictly modular. In the previous example of the light switch (Figure 11), regarding its direct environment, we could observe that it was modular from a spatial/mechanical/material point of view, but integral from an energy and from an information point of view.

165 4.3 Notes on modularity and architectural production

4.3.1 MODULAR KNOWLEDGEABILITY The evolution of non-physical modules, namely in software, has contributed to expand the horizons of the conceptions of modularity in physical elements. In software architecture, modularization is key for program development, since each program is typically made up of one or more modules, written in a certain language. Each may contain several routines, and may be developed independently, easing testing, debugging, and so forth. As modules, these can be assembled in the final program, but may also be re-assembled in other programs. This dematerialization of the concept pushes forward the physical notion of modularity as self- contained functional units, their mapping and so forth. Indeed, the setting of a physical module can lay in its knowledgeability, rather than in its physical concretion370. This is, for instance, what occurs when reusing or recycling specifications from a former module, or, as in software development, when the known functionality of a certain module is used towards a different purpose or product than the original. On a broader perspective, thinking of a production-chain, in a way, this intellectual reuse blurs the limits between knowledgeability and a ‘traditional’ conception of module as a physical thing, rendering it closer to an evolutionary view of the technological development, built of successive incre- mental improvements. On a stricter perspective of knowledgeability, we can consider a knowledge module as a precedency of a physical module. That is the case with CAD, numerical or any other specification or representation of a constructive component. These abstract representations can be reused if the component is reused in the product (e.g. a building), or eventually in a different product of the product-set—e.g. a virtual module in a mass-customization product development. Additionally, the knowledge of the product- set can be seen as module itself, in which specifications are products made by combinations of self- contained functional units. That can be the case of structural, thermal, acoustic or other projects within an architectural coordination.

4.3.2 MODULARITY AND VARIABILITY As we have implied, modularization is driven by an aim to create variety (customize) while rationalizing production. Variety ought to be an output of customer choice, not an end in itself. However, there are numerous aspects to take into consideration. The customer will certainly want the best constructive quality and desired aesthetics that the available money can buy. However, choice processes often enter a gray area which can be hard to keep track. As demonstrated by the paradox of choice, having too many options to choose from can be highly counterproductive.

166 Some of the potential inefficiencies may be proactively avoided by following an insightful modular approach. For instance, it makes sense to discard right from the start useless external variety, that is, the choices in which the customer will not likely be interested in. Moreover, it also makes sense to tackle internal variety, that is, cost generating variations (e.g. materials, processes, solutions) with no added value to the customer. In the least, this is necessary because as components grow in diversity, logistics can get complex, harder to manage efficiently, and eventually causing more losses than benefits. Too much or unnecessary information make harder any choice process. Thus, in a context of offering product variability, the modular architecture should take in consideration the client’s requirements, grouping them in sets of variety with simplified information. In each set the variants can then be detailed. Finally, the information that is made available should be clear and concise, and focusing on the variety that can be useful to the client. Within the context of variability in a rationalized production, some rule-of-thumb tools can be used to minimize potential logistic complexity derived of choice processes. One way to do this is by implementing principles of similarity across the entire process—e.g. by standardizing, reusing resources, or simply implement geometrical symmetries371 whenever possible. In this perspective, it also makes sense to integrate previous modular knowledgeability, thus not only avoiding unnecessary work, starting over and over from scratch, but also making work potentially faster, more productive and with better quality. Moreover, by opting for departing from proven solutions, the associated risks can be reduced. Another effective way to attain rationalized solutions in this context is to transversally implement complexity reduction strategies in the overall process. That includes breaking down elements in independent units, enabling parallel work, distributing tasks, enhancing planning, or separate testing. Moreover, since discretized elements are more easily grasped, that will improve the handling and overall understanding of the elements by the people participating in the process. Architecture requires a knowledge of a wide variety of solutions, with often too much information to reliably be handled via cognition. Thus, attaining a greater clarity should be a permanent concern. Discretization, classification, hierarchization or decomposition are all aspects prone for incorporation in a modular sphere, contributing to reduce complexity while keeping up with the client’s requirements.

4.3.3 CHANGE AND OBSOLESCENCE One of the main aspects the modular architecture is closely bounded with is to the ease in which change can be implemented. In modular terms, the least change in a product means a change in at least one component. Modular architecture specifies which functional elements within a product are

167

constrained by a certain component, and which component should change in order to alter a functional element of the product in an intended way. In that sense, strict modularity entails a discrete perspective in which change can occur with independence. Conversely, integrality entails a kin perspective in which a change in an element can produce effects in every element. Within the life-cycle of a product, we can recognize various types of change motives: (a) Obsolescence, which can include upgrade (as technology and/or the user needs change, e.g. replace incandescent by LED lights) and wear (when features deteriorate, e.g. a broken hinge). (c) Adaptation, when products are subjected to an environment change (e.g. converting an old house to be fully accessible when occupants have special needs). (b) Add-ons, when products are featured as a base unit for user adding components (e.g. desktop computers). (e) Consumption, when products use consumables (e.g. a water filter). (f) Flexibility/Adaptability in use, when products exhibit diverse competences (e.g. hardwired flexible partitioning in office spaces), or have a though-of potentiality to convert towards accommodating diverse competences (e.g. an open-space). Most of these can simply be related with designed product characteristics (add-ons, consumption, flexibility/adaptability in use). Unlike adaptability, which implies design considerations, the case of adaptation refers no non-previously though-of environmental changes which normally occur on larger time-spans, corresponding to unknown or unpredictable circumstances at the time the product was developed. Therefore, adaptation is out of a design or product management scope. Finally, we have the obsolescence, which is somewhere in between. Indeed, although some obsolescence aspects may be out the design or management prediction ability or competences, others are foreseeable, thus requiring action to be taken, otherwise potentially incurring in several risk factors. Indeed, among these, obsolescence is perhaps the case that raises the most questions related with the designer and producer responsibility. Certainly, it can have a major impact on firms of all sizes and sectors, affecting all sorts of products, and eventually upon various stages of the product’s lifecycle. It thus may lead to potential high-costs, such as expensive replacement of parts or repair works, or even the need to redesign or requalify. This can harm not only profitability, but also firm’s competitive edge or reputation. In a perfect storm, it can even affect firm’s very survival. Nevertheless, obsolescence is unavoidable, the producer knows it, and the client also does. To attain a successful new product development two critical goals must be accomplished, that is, to meet customer needs and minimize time-to-market. However, strategies to accommodate both can often be conflictual, often clashing in obsolescence-related issues372. Indeed, more than the awareness of obsolescence by both the producer and the client, the issues arise mostly in function of

168 falling in meeting certain expectations. That is true about performance, as it is about obsolescence expectations. Downstream, there are several reactive ways to manage and mitigate obsolescence. Namely, can- nibalizing parts from product returns, getting alternate (form, function and fit) replacement from the original or a different manufacturer, finding the closest equivalent replacement part or procuring in the after-market. Also, mainly for those parts with expected shorter lifespan, it can be useful to make a lifetime stock, or buy parts in bulk and stock them in inventory for future needs, particularly when knowing that products or parts may be discontinued. There are also more sophisticated reactive strategies, such as reverse engineering, which may not always be possible to implement. Upstream, prior to a market stage, it should be established a pro-active and/or tactical management of obsolescence as a key way to mitigate associated risks. Among these, in one extreme, particularly in relative lower value products, it can be included a so-called programmed obsolescence, particularly in those products where a higher pace of technological development is verified or in those products more depending on trends, which makes them more likely disposable in a relatively short term. On the other extreme, particularly in relative higher value products, it can be included product follow up strategies, customer assistance, and so forth. Obviously, company’s business plans differ, as they target markets, and thus their obsolescence strategies. For instance, a consumer hardware OEM will likely be more prone to consider obsolescence as a business as usual strategy. Conversely, an electronic hardware supplier for aerospace systems will certainly regard obsolescence from a longer-term perspective. In that sense, it is worth mentioning a sentence attributed to Bill Gates, where he states: “The only big companies that succeed will be those that obsolete their own products before someone else does”373. Regardless a debatable liberalist ideology, the statement is nonetheless enlightening. In a management context, obsolescence can also be seen as a way to make modularly conscious sourcing decisions. In OEM’s, in those components with a high-modularity/high-obsolescence profile it can make more sense to focus on outsourcing, particularly if the technology is not completely aligned with the business core development. On the other extreme, in a low-modularity/low-obsolescence profile, components are weak outsourcing candidates, and simultaneously may be critical for service and warranty issues. In a low-modularity/high-obsolescence component profile, it can be positive to keep a technological edge in these parts, as well as making in-house production and/or establishing strong supplier relations. Finally, in a high-modularity/low-obsolescence component profile, it is when parts are the strongest candidates for outsourcing, and are not likely relevant for warranty or service issues374. When we cross different degrees of modularity with different degrees of expected obsolescence, we can get a panorama of what a business focus should be in each circumstance. We can thus retain

169 what the design efforts should concentrate on to maximize overall performance. Although not always wise or feasible, keeping products with a high degree of modularity enables the designers to test on components that may have greater potential for influencing the performance, and thus the value of the system.

4.3.4 IMPLEMENTING A MODULAR ARCHITECTURE In design terms, the idea of going modular can be appealing, but in practice there are essential limitations to the design that should be overcome. Making a modular product is extremely difficult, because modularity adds a new series of requirements and constraints. The interface can take up space and resources that otherwise would not be there, at least not so prominently. Every component must be tested with every other in every possible configuration to ensure that they all function together. Although some testing can be done virtually, with the aid of IT’s, nonetheless this means that testing and eventual certification are onerous, with a significant weight in development costs. Moreover, to be market competitive, products must offer comparable output vectors (cost, time, quality, scope) at comparable price points. In the least, eventual design gains must acceptably trade- -off with eventual losses, such as with pondering in adding flexibility for replacement of parts, or considering end-of-life or upgrade scenarios. The case of Google’s failed Project Ara, set to develop a modular phone, showcased many of these issues. For companies, ultimately the difficulty is to meet an attractive price point while they remain solvent throughout the process. In the worst-case scenario, the danger is to end up with a monstrous and expensive Frankenstein that, despite the qualities, no one wants to love. Products may be designed and fabricated without ever explicitly considering many of modularity’s notions. However, if the modular architecture is integrated during development, that does not typically occur in early stages. Indeed, it usually happens after the design and the basic technological principles are established. However, while it is of key relevance, there is no such thing as an optimum modular architecture in all cases. The task of bringing together a modular system is immense and likely very difficult. It is commonly hard to devise modules that are satisfactorily universal to be applied in a system and not only in one single product. Thus, some advantages of modularity can fade, namely when variability is introduced. Thus, in some cases, best option can be not to modularize, but instead to make dedicated, integral products. Table 6 synthesizes some of these concerns, advancing possible strategies in product development to implement modular or integral architectures.

170

Concept > Design > Detailed > Test > Development Design and Refinement

Discrete Approach

System Architect Component design Effort focused on checking as Team Leader proceeds in parallel for unanticipated coupling and interactions Map functional Monitoring of components elements to components relative to interface standards Required performance changes and performance targets localized to a few components Define interface standards and protocols Design performed by Choose technological ‘supplier-like’ entities working principles Component testing can Set performance be done independently targets Kin Approach Define desired features and variety System Integrator Constant interaction required to Effort focused on tuning as Team Leader evaluate performance and to man- the overall system Choose architectural age implications of design changes approach Emphasis on overall Required performance changes system-level performance targets Component designers propagate to many components are all ‘on the core team’ Division of product into a few integrated systems Component tests must be done simultaneously Assignment of subsystems to multi-disciplinary teams

Table 6. Differences in product development according to architectural approach, based on K. Ulrich (1995).

At a design level, pursuing modularity may be simply pursuing its knowledgeability, integrating it in thought processes. With the progressive use of its concepts, modularity can well become intuitive, informing design decisions on whether following one direction instead of the other. A simple example illustrates this idea (Figure 17). In the development processes of the modular AHP house design that we will later be detailing, architects had though-of an underlying grid for structural purposes. However, when it became the moment to build a prototype, decisions were taken in order to make some exceptions to the grid’s inherent rigidity. Namely, that occurred in establishing openings in the façade that could enter in conflict with the most sensitive structural points of the modules’ structure as envisioned in the design conception, that is, in their corners. The idea beneath was to prove that the constructive system could endure to go off rule if ever required. In the end, it proved feasible constructively, but not without evident structural exceptions which naturally redound in increased costs. Within a structural scope, both modules departed from a structural independence standpoint in relation to the other. The action of opening m1 or m2 would cause no change in that condition. However, the action of making an opening that occurs in the two simultaneously implies a change in their initial modular terms within a structural scope. This meant adding dependencies, rendering integral an otherwise discrete structural approach. It is quite a simple case, and its more sophisticated

171 Figure 17. A simple case of modular application. representation in a graph was not required to take a design decision ahead. However, here it serves the methodological purpose of explaining what is occurring in modular terms. In the multi-dimensional decision process of a design development often decisions are analogously simple. On its own, more than using more or less sophisticated tools to assess each problem as moving ahead in the design, modular knowledgeability may help in making design decisions. It is not a matter of getting it right or wrong, as options on the table may all be correct from a design point of view. It is a matter of making design decisions more consciously. A certain tendency or architectural authorship, can inhibit architects to regard their buildings as products, and more like works of art. However, the fact is that the reality of architectural production is rarely able to exclude the usage of manufactured products in their works. Certainly, not everyone has to go modular. However, a modular insight may benefit professionals and architectural production down the way.

4.3.5 MODULARITY AND ARCHITECTURAL FORM Architects may typically desire to have the possibility of disposing of a diversified array of solutions. However, modularity often falls in the accusation of restricting the possibilities that are at an architect’s disposal. Nonetheless, it is also known that highly complex shapes may be defined by modular arrangements. Mies van der Rohe employed a module of 24x33in for the Farnsworth house. Alvar Aalto reportedly said: “my module is the millimeter”. Indeed, ultimately it is all a matter of degree. In the shapes found in nature, say a rock shaped by the elements, the form devising processes can be described from a mathematical continuity perspective, meaning that the possibilities of arrangements given an initial condition are infinite. The generalization375 can straightforwardly be given by laying out a line segment with a given length l, where l ≠ 0, and figuring out how many possibilities there are of dividing that line in smaller segments (Figure 18a). Then, repeating the process with one of the remaining two segments, and subsequently the same with one of the remaining three, and so

172

Figure 18. A one-dimensional generalization of form processes: (a) continuous (kin), i.e. dividing the length l sequentially, starting in one; (b,c,d) discontinuous (discrete), assembling segments given by s(i) to form length l, in (b) i goes from 1 to n, in (c) a case of arrangements of (b), and in (d) with i always equal to 1. forth. In each step, there is an infinite number of possibilities. The original segment can analogously be of any scale and/or dimension, thus corresponding to a certain shape, for instance describing what happens to the stone when exposed to the elements. However, in artificial forms, or even in some living forms found in nature where patterns can be grasped, we can aspire to a description from a discontinuous perspective. We can also straightforwardly generalize it, but now instead of dividing a segment, we will be assembling one. Meaning, that instead of dividing, using real numbers, we will be adding positive integers. Thus, consider any arbitrary segment given by s(i), where i is the label of any given segment s in a finite universe of n segments, where i is never repeated, and that the sum of all the segments considered equals the length l, where l ≠ 0 (Figure 18b). In these circumstances, the possible arrangements that we have can be given by n!=1*2*3*…*(n-1)*n (Figure 18c). For instance, when we have 6 distinct segments, then the possible outputs are 6!=720. If i was always the same, then the possible arrangements would be only 1, since 1!=1 (Figure 18d). Moreover, since all segments would be equal, the way to assemble them would be irrelevant. In practice, as we shrink in modules size, increasing the n number of modules, in the limit we can approach a continuous form devising process. However, there is a substantial difference between both approaches. In one case, we are devising a form, shaping it as we move on, as a sculptor casts a form. On the other, we are assuming a pre-existing form, and we can approach it with more detail as we move on. The first we can relate with an abstract design sense. The latter has much more to do with a practical design sense, underlyingly constrained by the ability of a physical construction. Alt- hough also dealing with the first in early stages, the architectural production primarily depends on the latter. Indeed, a millimeter is nonetheless a module. For instance, we could also characterize great historical architectures, such as the Classical or Gothic, within a certain sense of modularly, given the repetition of elements such as columns, windows or bays. These have internal substructures, with decorative elements such as fluting or triglyphs.

173

Even in flatter zones, we can observe these qualities, for instance by the stereotomic given by the joints of even the smaller building elements. The appearance perceptually results from a balance between various layers and scales of substructures. The greatest the number of discontinuities, the higher the visual density, the lesser, the flatter. Finally, one can argue that this may seem dubious when we recall a classic distinction between dry and fluid bonded construction. However, fluid bonds can too be scrutinized modularly in respect to their properties and relative weight and properties for a mix modularity. It all comes down to the scope.

174

5 A PRACTICAL CASE: THE AFFORDABLE HOUSES PROJECT

5.1 Background

The housing problem is a permanent and transversal issue that has been crossing mankind’s history. Its continuous reappearance is signaled from multiple sources, varying on socio-cultural, economic or environmental conditions, and of which the related constructive or architectural aspects are just a small part. Contemporarily, the housing problem can be easily identifiable in those places where endemic misery is a reality. It is also straightforwardly detectable in those developing countries where the rapid economic growth, coupled with a significant demographic pressure in urban areas, among other aspects, ostensibly calls for housing to meet adequate quality levels [complement with: Annex, IV.4 Housing, a global issue]. With different shades, the problem is also resilient in wealthier nations. For instance, in some European countries there is a huge demand for the replacement of ageing housing stock not meeting minimum standards. In consolidated urban areas, these typically fall on renewal or refurbishment practices, but in places where there is more land availability, as typically are the urban outskirts, or in rural areas, new construction also often takes place. In parallel, as the built environment processes unfold, the generality of the construction sector, with few exceptions, remains one of the least industrialized activities. Moreover, as history has been demonstrating, factors such as economic constraints, or a fast pace culture of consumption, increasingly demand more efficient construction practices while keeping up with quality-delivery standards. Stirred up from the Portuguese reality, this sort of concerns was at the core of a housing concept focusing in affordable and efficient steel-based construction methods. The concept was developed under the Affordable Houses Project (AHP)376, a research and design initiative launched in January 2009, which came up in the context of an international taskforce, promoted by the ArcelorMittal company and under the International Scientific Networks in Steel Construction (ISNSC). The origins of the current thesis can be traced back to the research undertaken within the scope of the AHP, and has largely evolved around some of the perplexities which it arose. Following the ISNSC scope, the project primary involved civil engineering expertise in the field of steel structures. Altogether there were eight participating universities, coming from Brazil (São Paulo University), China (Tongji University), Czech Republic (Czech Technical University in Prague), India (IIT Bombay), Poland (Rzeszow University of Technology), Portugal (University of Coimbra), Romania (The ‘Politehnica’ University of Timisoara) and Sweden (Lulea University). As set by the promoter, the purpose was to develop innovative affordable houses, adapted to each of the different national contexts of

175

the participants. Each national group developed its work independently and results were presented and discussed in two general meetings. With investigators primarily linked to the University of Coimbra (UC) and/or the Institute for Sustain- ability and Innovation in Structural Engineering (ISISE) research unit, the Portuguese group was formed with cross-disciplinary concerns. It gathered mostly architects and engineers, the latter with diverse expertise (structural, thermal, acoustic, fire safety, sustainability assessment, and so forth)377. Despite the diversified contributions, architectural research would assume a key role in the group, as the approach primarily focused in establishing a solid conceptual ground over spatial and constructive issues, thus anchoring the subsequent developments of the different specialized domains378. Concordant to the initiative’s scope, the main lines of AHP’s preliminary brief can be summed up to the idea of affordability, while making an intensive use of steel. The remaining typical features outlining a design development, namely target market, building typology, house program, architectural solution, constructive technology, and so forth, had to be formulated by each of the national design teams from an analysis of their local realities. Providing an answer to these was scheduled for delivery on two project phases, each culminating in a general meeting joining the various national representatives. In the first stage of the project, what was called for was a portrait of the country’s socio-economic and construction contexts, as well as a preliminary design proposal. In the second stage, the debate took place mostly over a detailed design, with its components thoroughly described. The main elements mapping the two stages can be summed up in the topics presented in Table 7. As the work progressed, eventually some of these topics acquired more relevance, and some others were further added to complement the findings. The info retrieved from the first group of topics would be key to set the design foundations. Regarding the contribution towards the design proposal, such info can be divided in to two main areas. Firstly, a statistical analysis broadly characterizing the Portuguese territory in terms of its geographic, economic, or demographic dimensions, contributing to set the target market and the house program formulation. Secondly, a technical analysis, assessing structural, thermal or regulation issues, added by an observation of state of the art practices, contributing to establish a framework for the architectural and constructive features. The second meeting, which fundamentally was set to discuss the thoroughly detailed designs, signaled the conclusion of the international project, with its final call held in 2010. In the aftermath of the AHP, the Portuguese prefab company Coolhaven was created in that same year. The company took its first steps out of the AHP legacy, but in due time it would also develop its own designs, following business’ opportunities. However, the symbolism of the AHP remained, as Coolhaven’s first job was the construction of a full-scale AHP prototype. The prototype was a true proof-of-concept, since it enabled a real-world testing of the typological and constructive ideas.

176

Socio-economic General description of the country evaluation General description of the socio-geographic-economic conditions Statistical data about the country, population, construction market Description of the construction market Traditional Geographical, geotechnical, structural, architectonical constrains housing concept Overview of legislations and of the boundaries Description of the traditional housing concept Advantages and disadvantages of the traditional solutions Cost of traditional housing concept Innovative Technological state of the art concept General description of the innovative process, solution, choices, etc. Advantages and disadvantages Innovative aspects

STAGE 1 – DELIVERABLE 1 1 – DELIVERABLE STAGE Review of the selected technical solutions Preliminary architectural project Preliminary structural project and other design features Follow up General planning Critical points and risk analysis Final design and detailed General description description of the technical solutions Innovative aspects Advantage, disadvantage, feasibility study Detailed design Architectural project Structural, Thermal, Acoustics, Plumbing, and Electrical project Quantity survey and bill of materials Sustainability and life-cycle valuation Achieved quality and performance assessment Socio-economic assessment Economical evaluation Comparison with traditional housing concept and material STAGE 2 – DELIVERABLE 2 – DELIVERABLE 2 STAGE Social advantages Possible deployment, possibility for demonstration, etc. Table 7. AHP main topics.

Meanwhile, the research work progressed on a further fine-tuning of the concepts, with new research lines arising, and with the findings published in diverse scientific media. All in all, these would contribute for the development and registration of a European patent on a modular construction method for constructing dwellings—PE10792013(A1) 2013-10-25. Hereon we will be describing the main features of the AHP design and its progression up to the prototype construction. Additionally, we will be including related research that has since been developed apropos. More than a plain description, this is a critical observation over a process that is now possible to analyze with greater detachment, and by it favoring a better acknowledgement of the eventual methodological implications that can be extracted. Although there is a concern in presenting the themes in a sequential and logical way, the description does not strictly follow the chronological path of the findings in all its extension, but instead favors a conceptual clarification.

177 5.2 Preliminary remarks on the affordability concept

Affordability is a relative concept, depending not only on a certain cost or value, but also on if and how such cost can be met. The latter depends on factors such as capital availability, credit access or financing mechanisms in general. In a prospective house buyer or tenant, these can be ultimately linked to the subject’s income, the stability of such income, and so forth. Furthermore, affordability is a context-sensitive concept, and hence there are different conceivable approaches towards it379. Despite the intrinsic ambiguity, it may generally be acknowledged as aiming to somewhere in between a low-end and a high-end market. For a given territory, the analysis of the available statistical data can contribute to establish the price point that an average family may pay for a house, and from there derive construction cost benchmarks, potential target markets, or other relevant economic factors that have an upstream influence on the design. Informing the design with these boundaries is a critical task, as that is what ultimately sets what can and cannot be done. Surely, the designer’s concerns will differ from those of a real-estate promoter, contractor, or prospective buyer. Anyhow, at the least ethically, it should be the designer’s duty to assure the envisioned design can be made with the available resources. Notwithstanding, the final price tag of a building depends on multiple factors that far extend architectural options, such as those concerning spatial-constructive features. To start with, it will be depending in the variable land cost—i.e. the location380—which can directly or indirectly include marketing mechanisms, publicity effects, social status, and the like. There are also commissions, interests, additional speculative values, and so forth, that can be included. In the end, both the architectural and the location conditions are not dissociable. When introducing innovative construction practices, such as in the AHP case, a hands-on way to look at affordability from a designer’s perspective, is to make it comparatively, via construction area cost. In this case, that means establishing an area cost benchmark (e.g. cost/m2) of an ordinary house construction method, and from that reference working to attain spatial and material comparable purposes. Given the social suspicion which undermines the public opinion on some innovative constructive practices—as is utterly the case in a prefab—staying below such a threshold potentially also works favorably in terms of the attractiveness of the design solution towards the public, and hence in its potential marketability, salability, and so forth. In many ways, the cost/m2 is a much more practical approach from a design standpoint, since it fundamentally focuses on construction cost, discarding variables that can often be subjective or in the least harder to measure, adding unnecessary complexity to the design problem, and typically often out of the designer’s control. There is little that the designer can do within its deontological scope to lower the impact of the variable land/location in the affordability equation, except optimizing the available space within the given constraints. For such, strategies such as minimizing circulation areas or instigating to concepts

178

such as flexibility or adaptability can be used. On the other hand, since affordability is a relative concept, whoever may afford more expensive land will also likely afford more expensive construction, which again makes it hard to take useful generalizations in this matter. However, in those cases where a design is developed from a speculative basis, as in the AHP, statistics should contribute to inform the design381. This can lead to potentially more scalable solutions, helping to accomplish less onerous costs, and benefiting marketability prospects, the first gate for the product’s success. Statistically, in Portugal there is an oversupply of housing, with plentiful offer of multi-story apartment buildings. Therefore, the AHP focused in the residential sector, which is more likely located in suburban or rural areas, where land is typically cheaper. Figures disclosed that the dominant type in the residential sector in Portugal was the three-bedroom house, and that this type is also quite often intended as secondary or holidays’ house. Thus, adding to the affordability and marketability focuses, this explains why, in an initial stage, the design program was targeted to a two-story, three-bedroom residential house. In the Portuguese context, given the typical family structures and its evolution, as well as a propensity for a second house market, this could then be regarded as a versatile typology. Meanwhile, a severe economic crisis stroke the country, as well as the world economy. Some of the data collected at AHP’s early stages may now be outdated. However, it is our belief that the general principles are still sustainable, as they are laying in a relativist approach, grounded in abstract design principles, which conceptually encompass different needs and requirements, as well as their change over time. To a degree, this contradicts one of the initial purposes of the AHP promoter, which was to find specificities in the regional contexts of each of the participant countries. Although the design development took a different course in relation to these intents, these specificities indeed exist, and decisively contributed for the research to follow this direction, and not another.

179 5.3 The AHP design system

5.3.1 MAIN CONCEPTUAL LINES In a first approach, the design was thought of in terms of a residential house design exploring the potential of cold-formed steel structures382. Constructively, the preliminary goals were set in achieving a better, or at least comparable building performance with what would typically be attained with ordinary construction methods, and at a competitive construction speed and cost. To attain good output vectors, the constructive goals had to be inexorably linked with the spatial goals. The latter were essentially set in answering to different contemporary lifestyles. That meant designing homes for different kinds of families and their evolution, and as places that could congre- gate different uses, such as permanent or temporary work of the family members. Partly, this meant questioning the rigidity of functionalist models, instead appealing to notions such as flexibility or adaptability. To accomplish it, strategies such as endorsing typological variability, maintaining a certain open-endedness in the allocation of uses, or enabling future expansion/retraction of the construction, were thought of as beneficial to incorporate in the design. The analysis of the collected data initially led to set the housing program in a three-bedroom, two- floor residential house. However, given the goals that had been established, it became obvious that there could be more to the design than a limited one-of case. Instead, there could be multiple possible dimensions and formalizations. As result, in coexistence with constructive principles, the design came to be conceptualized as what can be called of a design system. Central to the idea of a design system was the purpose to achieve variability within a limited set of spatial-constructive components in a kind of rule-based system, grounded in modular principles. Thus, the design would be provided with a potential scalability, quality and cost controlled production, while enabling formal, material, size or cost variability to a prospective buyer. Instead of simple box-like houses or the like, the purpose was to make it possible to devise a myriad of shapes and configurations from a clear set of design components. Additionally, to address the flexibility or adaptability aspects, the design system also came to be conceptualized in terms of enabling ease of interior changes during building’s lifetime, as well as in terms of an evolutionary matrix to allow eventual future volumetric growth or reduction. In time, the design system also came to be thought of in terms of being adaptable to the multiple urban requirements of residential dwellings—i.e. attached, semi-attached, semi-detached and detached scenarios (Figure 23). Finally, in a later stage, the design system was also considered in more generic terms so to also include multistory buildings within its scope. Throughout the process different methodological conclusions have been extracted, which serve not only the purpose of the design system, but can be generalized to diverse other realities.

180

Since there can be strong fluctuations in land cost according with the location, and that may be a strong constraint in a final building cost, several options were taken to lessen its weight in the design. Straightforwardly, that meant that the design should be conceived to occupy the least possible plot of land. To attain it, it made sense to implement as a core measure the minimization of the main circulation space, to maximize useful areas, optimizing their ratio383. Thus, main circulation space was designed to have a central location in the plan layout, starting with centralizing the entrance area and, in the case of a second floor, locate the stairs within it. Finally, to minimize waste in vertical circulation space, the system, as thought of for the residential sector, would be limited to a two-floor height, plus an eventual basement. Nonetheless, if the two floors would not be required by a prospective buyer, the system was also feasible in a single floor. The basement, which could be used as a garage and/or storage, would be justifiable in those cases where terrain had a steeper, non-flat configuration. It could thus work as a sort of foundation plateau, assuring a flat, dry and solid grounding, on top of which the design system could seamlessly be implemented.

5.3.2 SETTING INITIAL MODULAR CONSTRAINTS The construction was to be made of a steel structure. Given the higher prices of rolled steel, option was to think the design in terms of the constructive potential offered by the relatively cheaper cold-formed steel (CFS). Comparatively, CFS also has the edge of its lightweight, making it more prone to handle and maneuver without requiring heavy machinery—theoretically, if provided with precut parts, a two-man team with not much more than a screwdriver can do the job. When compared with ordinary masonry or concrete construction, CFS is also more prone to production automation, and likely has an edge in terms of reduction of environmental impact, lowering construction waste and increasing recycling potential in a building’s life-cycle end (LCE) scenario. It also potentially simplifies repair and maintenance—e.g. in infrastructures, for piping or wiring replacement, or in changing interior materials. In theory, CFS can also offer greater potential in terms of spatial flexibility, making it easier to change internal walls, and eventually with the same occurring with the external walls, in a future case of expansion/reduction of the building. Summing it all up, if properly devised, these factors may contribute to assure an overall greater sustainable performance. Finally, since CFS enables construction up to four floors with ease, or even five floors in special cases, it was plentiful for the original aim of two-floor residential typologies. In any case, given that in a great part of the Portuguese territory buildings do not exceed four or five floors height, such also did not exclude an eventual possibility of devising multi-story from similar typological principles. From the technological CFS choice, a preliminary structural study assessed optimized span distances of the structural elements. At this stage, it mattered to understand what would be a reasonable

181

maximum span without compromising the structural behavior. One of the goals in mind was to minimize the amount of steel in use to achieve a cost-effective solution, while enabling a sound constructive solution. Thus, whatever the structural outcome, it was also important for it to be a practical, round figure, to simplify the assignment of standardized components to the construction. Thereby, the structural basis was settled in a 60cm grid, with the entire design regulated from that basis. The 60cm grid theoretically allowed a wide range of potentially useful discrete subdivisions or mul- tiplications, which was conceptually a key intention so to avoid as much waste as possible in the construction, thus improving its environmental performance. Its integer subdivisions can start from 1cm or 2cm (e.g. for tiny-sized materials), 5cm (e.g. for small-sized materials), 10cm (e.g. for materials and the bulk of internal walls), 15cm (e.g. for materials and some special internal walls), 20cm (e.g. for materials and some special internal walls) or 30cm (e.g. for materials, some dividing walls and external walls). Furthermore, if adding composed and/or multiple figures of 60cm, options increase. For instance, it can swiftly be attained measures of 40cm (e.g. 3×40cm=120cm=2×60cm) or 50cm (e.g. 6×50cm=300cm=5×60cm). With 90cm (3×½60cm) it is for instance possible to fit kitchen bench tops height. With 120cm (2×60cm) it was possible to attain the Portuguese legal minimum 110cm for corridor width, plus enabling a 10cm tolerance for a wall or other, and fitting the 240×120cm plasterboards’ or be close enough to the oriented stranded boards’ (OSB) of 244×122cm, thus theoretically minimizing potential waste in left overs after cutting the parts. With 240cm (4×60cm) it is attained a typical room-height, and fit for the plasterboards’ or OSB’s. This meant that the design system became supported in a dimensional coordination scheme. That also included the heights for windows and façades (which followed a ½60cm regulation). In terms of heights, the modules were also ruled by an economy principle, with the ceiling height established at the Portuguese legal minimum of 2.4m, to which added 30cm slabs to a total of 2.7m between floors. The windows were thought of to function at 30cm (½60cm) height increments, starting from the maximum 2.4m case (Figure 19). From these preliminary considerations, at least in theory, the construction could benefit of a greater potential of economies of scale in production. Concomitantly, the option to use modular dimensional principles assured an overall minimization of waste in construction materials, since it eased the compliance of standardized, industrially produced materials and components to the design instances casted from the design system.

182

Figure 19. Example of initial section constraints.

5.3.3 THE ORIGINAL AHP DESIGN SYSTEM The initial idea for the design system was to define a configuration that enabled a good functional organization, over one/two floors, and with the possibility of changes over time. Resembling pieces in the well-known tetris game, the proposal envisioned possible combinations within a limited number of shapes. A 0.60m×0.60m dimensional unit (u) defined the minimum modular framework. A module (m) of order u:(8, 7) (i.e. 4.8×4.2m), acted on the u grid, and a master-grid of order m:(2, 3) (i.e. 9.6×12.6m) on the m grid—where in any x:(v, u) the x denotes the grid order, described by the v and u values, which are positive integers, respectively denoting the grid’s rows and columns. All alternatives were compelled to this m:(2, 3) perimeter, including the possibility of expansion. Thus, the maximum area of ground occupation considered for a single dwelling was limited to the total of the six modules per floor (level) in a m:(2, 3) (Figure 20a). Modules’ horizontal combinations defined each of the possible shapes formed under the m:(2, 3) boundaries. Vertical combinations were anchored to a central module. For structural economy, vertical combinations were limited to structural precedencies, meaning that a level 1 (i.e. first floor) shape in its fullest occupation would be at most coincident with a level 0 (i.e. ground floor) shape. Exceptions would require a different structural philosophy (e.g. cantilevering), or additional structural support— which would be equivalent to more foundations in the level 0 (e.g. I2, L2, in Figure 20b–level 0). Con- structively that meant having an extra module in level 0, even if not fully occupied. Within these shapes, there could be layout variations, resulting in thousands of arrangements (Figure 21). To allocate functions, each module within a shape bared a main space that was either a kitchen, a bedroom, a living or a dining room. Exceptions occurred in central modules, assigned for entrance/staircase/toilet space. Secondary spaces, such as toilets or storages, were placed within the main spaces, establishing a hierarchy of functional allocation. These principles guaranteed a balanced use of the functional areas.

183

Figure 20. Grid (a) and combinations (b).

Figure 21. Illustration of variations on the case of level 0 (0-1.1).

184

Figure 22. Illustration of level -1 variations according to terrain adaptation scenarios.

Figure 23. Illustration of urban adaptation scenarios (a, b, c, d), example case (e), and developed cases (f, g).

185

Figure 24. Illustration of an urban ensemble in detached scenarios, and showing different overhangs hypothesis.

A catalogue of layouts sharing similar principles was produced for each of the shapes, regarding a two-floor scenario (e.g. in Figure 21). Topographical issues that could arise were depicted in a catalogue of distinct basement configurations that absorb the several possible types of land differences (Figure 22). Diverse urban and soil occupancy situations, namely, (a) attached, (b) semi-attached, (c) semi-detached, and (d) detached, were also addressed (Figure 23). In the first case, the suppression of at least one of the modules per level (such as in the shape of an internal patio) was imperative to ensure proper natural light and ventilation to every inhabited space. In a preliminary test case, the typological variants were also induced to a collective house scenario, in which a simple case of a four-story apartment building was designed. Finally, given a preliminary thermal behavior assessment, different architectural solutions, including diverse sized window heights and overhangs hypothesis were tested (Figure 24). Overall, the typological rationale endured the added constraints, which could be understood as a validation of the translation of the conceptual framework onto the design system. That was further supported with the development of a more detailed design case384.

5.3.4 AN ILLUSTRATIVE DESIGN CASE Considering the m:(2, 3) limits, a volumetric simulation was conducted to assess the validation of the design in a more detailed version (Figure 25). Following the initial research, it was developed a two-story, three-bedroom house typology. To optimize urban infrastructures and land plots, the smaller dimension of the parcel is parallel to the street, and the major dimension is perpendicular. Each floor has an L-shape, with the top shape superposing the bottom shape in a mirrored position.

186

Figure 25. Illustrative design case.

The house program includes a living and/or dining room, a kitchen, three toilets, a storage area and a covered parking place. Social and private areas are vertically segregated. The level 0 contains the social areas, while the level 1 has the bedrooms and other private areas. The program is suitable for a family of four—e.g. a couple with two children—but it is also easily adaptable to other occupations. The kitchen was placed closer to the street front, and designed to allow meals to be held within it. In the central module is located the core distribution zone, where an entrance hall gives access to the kitchen, a toilet, the staircase and the living/dining room. Adjacent to the living room, there is the ability to set a small working space. Given the overlap of the two mirrored L-shapes, the level 1 provides a roof in the level 0 for car parking. Arriving to the level 1, there is a direct distribution to the

187

spaces, minimizing circulation area, giving access to the bedrooms, toilet, and a master-bedroom with private toilet. To assess the adaptability, a few variations were tested over the same illustrative case. In level 0, next to the living room, it is feasible to add/remove a small, informal office space, just by adding or removing a wall (or shelf) and a door. In level 1, the two contiguous rooms can be transformed in a single master bedroom by changing the door placement, resulting in a 3-room bedroom, with a toilet, a primary space for the bed and a secondary space for either closet room or small home office. From a similar design base, it was also tested if typologically the design could endure a growth in length, increasing the area of the living room and of a bedroom, and if it could endure a different plot orientation, with both hypothesis proven feasible385.

188 5.4 Optimizing the design system

5.4.1 EXPANDING THE GRID In this part of the work we aim at further clarifying the design system, instilling a deeper methodological insight. In that sense, we have further developed the initial object towards an optimization of its modularity. By doing it, we have also expanded it to other domains, aiming at multi-dwelling housing that could share similar principles. The latter necessarily incites to an expansion of the initial grid. Indeed, considering the m:(2, 3) derived shapes, we could only achieve it in a limited number of cases within the initial boundaries. However, with no further criteria, grid expansion can be limitless (Figure 26), and thus more constraints are required than those that have initially been set forth. We started by simplifying the rationale, discarding shape instances with shared similarities. For example, in Figure 20, shapes C1, C2, C3 and C4 were condensed to a single C reference from where the others derive. The m:(2, 3) shapes are thus released from their initial referential. Thus, excluding isometries—i.e. geometric transformations that maintain the inner congruence of shape elements, as are translation, mirror or rotation—the total number of horizontal combinations is in fact less (Figure 27) than what was considered in the AHP. Whereas in a real case the additional possibilities may be relevant, given different solar positioning, views, and the like, in an isometric/topological sense these are essentially equivalent. The next simplification step was to reenact the modular essence of the shapes. The AHP limited module’s combinations within a m:(2, 3) and to a single dwelling over a maximum of two levels. Yet, a typology can exist in a shape that is different from these. For it to occur the modular order must be bigger (i.e. the grid size must increase). With the same topology, for the m:(2, 3) it was initially considered 10 possible derived shapes (Figure 27b), but many more are conceivable. For instance, if it was a m:(4, 2), the number would boost to 24 possible shapes, in a m:(3, 3), it would be 36, and so

Figure 26. Illustration of a virtually limitless expansion (no added constraints) of m:(2, 3) derived shapes.

189 Figure 27. Initial m:(2, 3) derived shapes (a) and their essential members (b).

Figure 28. Arrangements in (a) m:(4, 2) and (b) m:(3, 3) (left, in black), and some of their possible bi-part subdivisions using elements from a m:(2, 3) (right, in white). forth. Nevertheless, any of these 24 or 36 possibilities could be composed by combinations of the previous m:(2, 3)—ultimately, if given no further limitations, any m:(v, u) could be reduced to a combination of a single module (Figure 28). To assure a comparable, equitable principle, which would not significantly distort the design system principles, typological tests primarily focused in assessing the limits of combining m:(2, 3) shapes, and variations within relatable constraints. If limiting the possible shapes to these (10 in total, or 11 if including a single module shape), but using a larger m:(v, u), theoretically we can maintain the same typological principles. Yet, as we will later observe, different constraints arise—typological, constructive, legal, and so forth—as well as new possibilities of juxtaposing and/or connecting the different shapes.

190 Given that with bigger grids, shapes are more diverse (e.g. Figure 28), methodologically it can be useful to establish a shape notation to unambiguously clarify descriptions. Indeed, when increasing grid sizes, it is no longer feasible to label them in a shape suggestive fashion, as we have done under a m:(2, 3), with L-shape, U-shape, T-shape, and so forth. Indeed, when grid size increases, and shapes within get more complex, it is hard to keep track of what kind of shape is being addressed with this method, and it can easily be equivocal. Thus, for some purposes, it is necessary to have a shape notation, or codification procedure of some sort.

5.4.2 DEFINITIONS AND FORMALISMS OF MODULAR SHAPES

Figure 29. Illustrating a matrix formalism through the description of a L-shape, and unfolding to topological and typological values, where in (d) are added connections to establish a topological path, and in (e) topology is labeled with typological values via a set of externally given base program rules. The subscript notation for m—in (d) and (e)— follows the conventional matrix notation, where in the comma separated values the first indicates row and the second the column position in the matrix.

Existing mathematical notation provides the tools to disambiguate shape labelling (Figure 29). With it, we could describe an L-shape through a matrix of order (2, 3), with the values and criteria of the matrix order corresponding to what we have been describing for grid purposes—i.e. comma separated values first indicating the number of rows and then of columns using positive integer values. Following this formalism, the matrix order can be extended as far as necessary, and in it straightforwardly acknowledge the module’s positions. From there, we may establish a direct bond between the topology and the typology, that is, in assigning label values to each module, which establish the guidelines or rules of their devising intents, for instance in functional or programmatic description, and so forth. Although of far greater range, the method can be regarded as essentially analogous to the graphical representation. It thus shares some of its qualities, but also some of its limitations, particularly when attempting to denote it compactly, such as we do with an L-shape. Thus, a different descriptive method may be necessary to complement the matrix description. As in any modular construction, we must start by defining the modular scope. In our devised descriptive method, a shape is a discrete set of one or more modules within a tridimensional grid of a modular scope s, respectively with (u, v, w) relative coordinates, and through which is possible to establish at least one continuous path, using orthogonal (i.e. horizontally/vertically through uv, uw or vw) connections (Figure 30). In the higher s+1 scope, the coordinates will be absolute in respect to a modular multi-shape assembly referential, that we can name (x, y, z). Alternatively, for the benefit of congruence, we can name each respectively (us, vs, ws) and (us+1, vs+1, ws+1), or any of these generically

191 Figure 30. Illustration of a modular shape definition via connectedness, in which in each case a discrete shape is defined by a continuous color in a given modular rank. In (e), the expression is-1 stands for a modularly incremented distance (i) of a s-1 scope, which is thus analogous with connectedness features in (f). In the AHP, the is-1 would be a modular denominator, corresponding to a dimension of the modular unit u of 0,60×0,60m.

by (us+i, vs+i, ws+i), with i corresponding to any integer value (positive, negative or null), with the higher scope corresponding to the absolute referential in the considered modular system. In our design, the m description equivalates to an s, and the u to an s-1. As shown in Table 8, and illustrated in Figure 31, we have devised a compact shape descriptive formalism which can be used complementarily to the powerful matrix description. In it, from left to right, we can first read the row, i.e. the position on the v axis. Then, in subscript, the columns that occur in that row, i.e. the positions in the u axis. Finally, in superscript, the level (w) in which these are contained, i.e. the positions on the w axis. All u, v or w values are integers, but with a difference regarding w. The starting w is conventionally 0 (as for level 0) and can go either negative or positive. Conversely, u or v are positive integers, since they refer to countable objects (there are no negative or null modules). The full notation criteria are shown in Table 8 and illustrated in Figure 31. To simplify, when there is only one level (i.e. one w unit) considered, or when it is irrelevant for the analysis on whether w is implied, the corresponding notation can be suppressed (e.g. Figure 31d). When there is more than one option to make the shape notation, it may be best to privilege the most economical way—e.g. in Figure 31d, the [1:21:2] notation could have been written longer in [11:221:2]

A or as an array of a single module, i.e. 22:[11]. Anyhow, formal option should be to use what is most convenient in each case, which can also be privileging consistency, rather than economy. There are several ways this notation could be presented without loss of content. For instance, instead of using subscripts and superscripts, we could have used parenthesis, slashes, or other forms to distinguish

w the different elements—e.g. writing [(1/1:2)(2/1)]w instead of [11:221] . However, we found this way economical, both in terms of the number of characters and line length used, and that it provided a relatively better readability, particularly if making use of larger expressions, (e.g. Figure 31c in the b•c description). With this formalism, we can describe multiple modular shape stages: (a) a shape relatively, i.e. through its inner modular-grid features based on its u, v coordinates, distributed in one or more w levels of a modular scope s system; (b) a shape absolutely, e.g. through x, y and z coordinates of a multi- shape, higher scope s+1 modular-grid system; (c) a shape relatively plus a translation operation (T) from

192 (a) shape-modules cases (b) notation e.g. (c) description of notation e.g. Isolated sa=[vu]w row v, column u, level w pair of isolated columns’ value sb=[vg,h]w row v, columns g and h, level w interval of consecutive columns’ value [vg:h]w row v, columns from g to h, level w interval of consecutive and isolated columns’ value [vg:h,u]w row v, columns from g to h and column u, level w in two rows [vupg:u]w row v, column u, and row p, columns from g to u, level w isolated equal rows’ value [v,pu]w row v and p, column u, level w interval of consecutive equal rows’ value [v:zu]w from row v to z, column u, level w multi-level shape [vupg:u]w,[vu]w+1, … row v, column u, and row p, columns from g to u, level w, and row v, columns from a to u, level w+1 isolated equal levels’ value [vu]w,w+i row v, column u, in levels w and w+i interval of consecutive equal levels’ value [vu]w:w+i row v, column u, in levels w and w+i translation T from a referential x, y, z Ta:sa=Tyxz:[vu]w shape a, translated T from a higher scope x, y, z referential translation T in vector form Ta:sa=v:[vu]w shape a, translated with a vector v array distribution m, n, o of a shape Aa:sa=Amno:[vu]w shape a, repeated in array A with m, n, o instances two combined shapes sa•sb= [vu]w•[vr,u]w shape a and shape b

Table 8. Shape notation.

Figure 31. Notation application examples in a s:(2, 3) grid (a, b, c, and d) and in an expanded s+1:(2, 7) grid.

a given origin os+1 of a multi-shape system; (d) higher/lower-scope shape-compounding of any of the former in any s+i (with i as any positive or negative integer), algebraically enabling modularly para- metrized grids and/or an array of multi-shapes with different modular scales. To complete the picture of operators, aside a T and an A, we could include a mirror (M) or rotation (R) operator (Figure 32). Anyhow, for this we could generalize T as special displacement cases of R, either as a theoretical R where the axis of rotation recedes to infinity, or as two consecutive R operations over axis of rotation at finite distances and with 60º magnitude and inverse directions each (Figure 32b). Moreover, as implied in our modular rationale, M can simply be the result of swapping the locations of one or more modules within a shape, i.e. making exclusive use of T operations.

193 Figure 32. Illustration of a R (rotation) and T (translation) operations. In (a) R uses a simplified θe formalism, describing a unit vector e (indicating the direction of an axis of rotation) and an angle θ (describing the magnitude of the rotation about the axis) to be applied in the relative origin os of a shape. In (b) is shown T as a special case of R.

Figure 33. Illustration of a simultaneous use of R, T and A (array) operators to form a triangle-based grid (g) and a triangle-based shape (sg).

Although not developed in our case, R enables the tridimensional description of non-modular relations between different modular sets, or of modular elements that do not follow orthogonal connections as it occurs with triangular modules with tridimensional relations. This notation may not be as intuitive as when describing shapes by labelling each with a resembling letter. It certainly is not as intuitive as simply illustrating them, as is notorious in the example of a triangular grid. Yet, it gains in clarity and precision, disambiguating the relative description of shapes, whether they are simpler, or more intricate or complex, as well as their positioning within a considered multi-shape referential. Whether using this formalism, or any other method, any clarification can be a positive contribute to an applicability, for instance to keep track, compare and account modular shape formations in digital aided developments. The latter are outside the direct scope of our work. To our concern, this is essentially a methodological insight on the potential of modular shape formation, and a resource to apply in the remaining descriptions that follow.

194 5.4.3 TACKLING DEPENDENCIES The approach that was followed in the initial AHP design presents a considerable amount of different layout possibilities. This occurs both volumetrically, with the different shape combinations, but also internally, given that the structure and external envelope can be understood altogether as a sort of free void to be filled, with the internal walls able to cross different modules. While the latter entails a world of possibilities, it also hosts more spatial or constructive dependencies regarding a modular perspective. This can be a limitation for the potential of adaptability of a design, as well as for its ex-situ production potential. We have thus addressed endogenous adaptability (internal changes) and exogenous adaptability (volumetric changes) aspects of the design system. We concluded that any main functional allocation should be discretized within a module, namely kitchen (K), bedroom (B), living room (L), and dining room (D). Thus, each would have to roughly correspond to a module, regardless any secondary functional allocation that could fit within, namely the toilets, stairs or storage spaces. Also, internal partitions defining secondary functional areas were no longer allowed to spatially belong to more than one module, and instead be clearly discretized within each module, as in Figure 35a, thus reducing dependencies. At most, these were tolerated in the modular threshold offset zone within certain conditions. For this, the self-imposed offset criteria envisioned that it either must be added area to one functional space or to the other. The underlying principle is to avoid wasted interior space, by avoiding redundant internal walls that had been dimensionally calibrated as external walls given the structural constraints. Anyhow, in more detailed design stages, these considerations must consider needs for infrastructural space. It should in all cases be present the concern in keeping the integrity of the modular design, that is, insofar as maintaining the original alignments as much as possible (Figure 34). In a modularity context, whether with this or other criteria, this is a core matter since it addresses the interface component of the modular design. The modular optimization conducted to internal partitions to be contained within modules, or at most to occur with variations within in their threshold offset limits, maximizing their constructive independence. Moreover, since the most demanding spaces in terms of area allocation (e.g. a living room), could, in their least, be contained within the modules’ dimensions, such meant that, in principle, the idea would be typologically feasible in every case. Alongside with restricting the constructive dependencies between different modules, clarifying their interfaces via offset criteria, it rose a related idea of establishing the vertical circulation areas to occupy approximately half module width. The symmetrical layout meant that the staircase could be placed in equal terms on two different positions in a module, and with it any functional space that shared the same module, such as a fully accessible toilet if required (Figure 35).

195 Figure 34. Two examples of addressing modules’ interface, with application of threshold offset criteria, including some possible variations.

Figure 35. Modular dependency reduction and improved symmetry in relation to the initial AHP design.

Figure 36. Examples of (a) endogenous adaptability with typological variations from two symmetrical [11:321] shapes, and (b) exogenous adaptability from a [11:321] base shape.

196

This simple tweaking has increased the module’s combinatorial possibilities, while it entailed a simplification of the constructive principles. Concurrently, it contributed to enhance the endogenous and the exogenous adaptability potential of the design system, as it can be verified with the examples in Figure 36. To validate the endogenous adaptability (Figure 36a), as a case-study, we used the most common

3-bedroom typology, set in two symmetrical [11:321] shapes in both levels. In it was observed that it could be feasibly implemented an internal functional reorganization. In level 1, a bedroom can change into a private zone of a new enlarged suite, with plenty of closet area or with a private reading room. The space reserved for a fully accessible toilet in level 0, can be easily transformed into a smaller toilet with a contiguous closet/storage area or into an enlarged hall zone with an informal function. Also in level 0, an office/bedroom zone contiguous to the living room can easily be created by reserving a part of it, without significant loss to the living room area. The zone of the toilet/kitchen can also be easily changed into a smaller toilet plus storage space, or as an enlarged kitchen with plenty of dinning space, and so forth. That is, it can easily evolve from t3 to t2 or even t3 to t4 and vice-versa, with plenty possible configurations and without affecting the exterior of the building or its infrastructures. Addi- tionally, there is a polyvalent quality to some of the house spaces, which easily allows interchangeability on functional allocation. It can be argued that some of this potential endogenous adaptability occurs because areas are generous. Indeed, they are if compared with the legal minimum in Portugal. Nevertheless, these areas are not over the average that can be found in the Portuguese real-estate market386. Anyhow, if it can be true that it is harder to transform a smaller area, the issue does not end with the area argument alone, since other constraints also must be considered, namely the form factor, which interferes in the internal fit-out transformation potential, as well as its furnishing, not mentioning the infrastructural philosophy adopted, and so forth. As to the exogenous adaptability (Figure 36b), again what was tested was primarily about the typological potential, and not so much the constructive aspects. Nonetheless, it should be technically feasible, contingent on the constructive principles in use, namely on the size/complexity of the components.

As a matter of simplification, and easier comparison and explanation, a [11:321] shape was again considered with a stabilized internal program. If one module of the m:(2, 3) is exclusively dedicated to entrance and/or vertical circulation and/or toilet area, it can be generically said that each added module conceptually corresponds to a bedroom unit. In that sense, two modules correspond to t1, three to t2, four to t3, five to t4, six to t5. This is valid for a building in an isolated a plot, otherwise one of the modules must be kept free. Hence, from this assumption, and to ensure that every compartment would have contact with at least one facade wall to have proper light and ventilation, the maximum typology considered within this case was a t4.

197

5.4.4 OUTLINING A MINIMUM COMBINABLE UNIT The purpose of exploring junctions between two or more shapes follows the need of assessing how multi-shapes may behave, having in mind its modular optimization. By combining shapes, we set a spatial/formal frame where to allocate functional elements. This means that junctions cannot be made blindfolded and/or merely formally. Instead, they follow constraints that are both external, such as those derived from regulations, or internal/self-imposed, such as those resulting from a certain design philosophy, or from functional requirements. When conducting a new design exploration, the internal constraints will likely have to adapt to accommodate new developments, and new constraints may arise, all-in-all contributing to clarify the optimal limits of the study object. As opposed to an independent m:(2, 3) derived shape, as it had occurred in the AHP, here we have begun to explore how many functioning shapes we could fit into this grid. In this case, it is primarily mandatory for the location of the vertical circulation within the grid to become flexible, as opposed to be locked in a central location of the m:(2, 3), as it was in the AHP. That may not necessarily be required in the least constrained detached scenario, where there is freedom of access to any module from every direction. However, in more constrained settings, this can be harder, or even impossible to achieve. We have tested several scenarios for two level shapes within a m:(2, 3), starting by a combination of two, then three, and finally of four shapes. Eventually combinations with more elements would be possible. However, if growing in number of shapes within this or any other limited m:(v, u), they necessarily decrease in size, and thus the ratio between horizontal/vertical circulation areas and useful areas may lose efficiency. Moreover, if we have shapes formed by a one-to-one (i.e. 1-1) vertical correspondence—as it occurs when we have six shapes over two floors in a m:(2, 3), where each shape can only develop vertically—then we will have typologies which will be mostly dedicated to vertical circulation, with little room for anything else. Thus, for area economy purposes, as a minimum vertically developed shape, it makes sense to consider that, when a level has just one module, on the other level there must be at least two modules—i.e. a 1-2 configuration. In the latter, we can have a t0 typology as shown in Figure 37, which thus illustrates a minimum two-level dwelling unit. Observing the examples of minimum shapes in Figure 37, it is noticeable that, despite (d) and (e) cases are possible, they have much less available area for functional allocation since more is wasted in circulation due to the stairs positioning. From the same base module (a), entrance points can occur in all four orientations (Left, Right, Front, and Back), as long as a full accessible toilet is not required next to the stairs on the base module (4), given it is not possible to deploy it in all cases in the other level. Despite some faults, if we would have further levels to develop vertically, using two modules in every level except for the base module, we could plausibly consider this scheme as viable in most cases. Nonetheless, any such application would be constrained by the feasibility of an access path to the

198

Figure 37. Example of four possible minimum shapes—(a)•(b), (a)•(c), (a)•(d), and (a)•(e)—over two levels, using the two different orientations, m:(2, 1) and m:(1, 2) given by the module’s asymmetry by the u:(7, 8). base module, which would be depending on the design of the multistory building in which the shape would be contained. Anyhow, since there are four possible entry directions and four possible development directions on a subsequent level, this kind of layout can be extremely versatile. For illustration purposes, following the full occupation case in a two-level configuration, we have tested several combinations. We did not start directly by the arrangement of shapes, but by the arrangements of numbers of modules between any two levels (Table 9). These have in the least a base module, plus two on the other floor, or 1-2 configuration. From here we can derive multiple shape variants, of which we have illustrated only a part (Figure 38). In the simplest case, of which there was no point to illustrate, to fill two m:(2, 3) levels we would have the entire space filled by a single shape, with a single arrangement possibility (i.e. a 6-6). Likewise, on the opposite end, reducing shapes to a 1-1, we would also have a single possibility, which nonetheless would be non-efficient given that half of the internal space would be occupied with circulation. However, as we have said, our minimum has been defined in a 1-2, and that is in fact the core conclusion, given that it is what enables the diversity of arrangements within this grid as well as it would in many other setups (Figure 39). However, we would have to use another configuration if modules’ junction required to use direct stairs instead of 180º stairs. In that case the minimum configuration would have to be a 2-2 (Figure 40 (d) and (e)).

199

(1) number of shapes (2) arrangements of numbers of modules between two levels (in left and right) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g)

2 1-5 2-4 3-3 5-1 4-2 3-3 3 2-2 2-4 2-3 3-1 3-2 3-1 3-3 2-2 2-1 2-2 2-2 2-1 2-3 2-1 2-2 2-1 2-1 1-3 1-3 1-2 1-2 4 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 2-1 1-2 2-1 2-1 Table 9. Possible arrangements of numbers of modules (base arrangements) in a m:(2,3), excluding the non-viable both extremes, the 6-6 and the 1-1 case. In each case left and right-hand sides of the hyphen separator are swappable without loss of generalization.

Figure 38. Illustration of all of the different combinations within a m:(2,3), in which shapes have the same total number of modules in each case, considering both levels—except (f), for comparison purposes. In (a), (b) and (c) are represented the two-shape cases, and in (d) and (e) the three-shape cases.

Figure 39. Examples of other formal possibilities using the 1-2 as core principle.

200 5.4.5 IMPROVING SYMMETRY AND BEYOND We concluded that we could have significant gains in terms of combinatorial potential when making the vertical circulation module symmetrical. Without loss of generalization of shape formation and functional allocation on a m scope, we can further improve symmetry if instead of basing m on a u:(8, 7), we base it on a u:(8, 8). As consequence, the potential for different junctions between shapes is increased (Figure 40). As we have seen earlier, we can substantially upgrade the original modules of a u:(8, 7) base by inputting a symmetrical configuration to the staircase positioning. However, as shown on Figure 40b, if we need to rotate the direction through which the 180º stairs are launched, we can no longer maintain the same principles. In the original design, these were oriented through the longer side. To allow modules to rotate while keeping the same design principles, we would have to change stairs’ construction. That would imply losses on both economies of scale in modular construction, but most importantly, it would severely limit the stairs comfort and potential use, namely in terms of adaptability to disabled users’ accessibility. Another vertical circulation alternative could be the direct stairs (Figure 40d and Figure 40e). Anyhow, this is a far less versatile solution, given that it implies more spatial dependencies—e.g. in Figure 41c and Figure 41d there is no other possible direction to launch it.

Figure 40. Increased symmetry by using u:(8, 8) modules.

201

Figure 41. Detailed example of the increased symmetry implications.

By improving symmetry, using square modules with u:(8, 8) dimensions, we are also implicitly increasing modules’ areas. However, that extra area can also be decisive to assure minimum spatial quality, particularly in more constrained cases, such as the allocation of a bedroom within a module that is simultaneously used for circulation purposes (Figure 41e). Indeed, if we compare bedrooms, in Figure 41d and Figure 41e, we observe that the added space enables a central bedroom with higher standards and also that it is possible to even have another toilet allocated if necessary. Indeed, the use of more area per module does not mean per se that area is being wasted. Instead, it can decisively contribute to improve spatial standards. For future development of the modular design, we think that it makes sense to evolve towards compoundable smaller modules that may enable more varied outputs. As an example of how that might occur, in Figure 42 we show modules of three interrelated sizes. The smaller is what we can call of minimum functional unit, where we can allocate with ease most of the required functions in a house. When we double its size, we can either have a second function allocated under similar constraints, or we can extend the area of a functional space, which can particularly make sense in the case of a kitchen (K). We can extend the logic to when we triplicate the minimum unit size. As shown in Figure 42d, the threshold offset criteria clearly arises as an essential modular design device. Appar- ently, from what is shown in Figure 42e, this kind of three-module solution can lead to very diversified solutions. Intuitively, in the least it seems to have potential for a successful applicability in residential housing. This is ultimately due to its smaller grid. As we decrease modules’ size, we increasingly may leave a ‘block’ appearance, and come closer to a continuum: an 8-bit space-invader will never be as refined as it would in 32-bit.

202

Figure 42. Illustration of what future developments may look like, using smaller modules as modular compounding base for more intricate and varied outputs.

203 5.4.6 LIGHT AND VENTILATION CONSTRAINTS In the original AHP design, shape junctions formed a single dwelling unit. Its m:(2, 3) grid was strategically devised for all modules to benefit of at least a façade with direct contact with the exterior for light and ventilation (d). However, when expanding grid dimensions, some modules will no longer be able to have d, except in roof openings when no other modules are positioned above. Disregarding the latter, and restricting to horizontal junctions, when using single row shapes, such as the [11:3], we can combine more than a dwelling unit within a m:(2, 3) grid. However, there are only three of those single row shapes derived from this grid—the [11], [11:2], and [11:3]—which limits potential horizontal arrangements. Nevertheless, as we have earlier elaborated, working from limited scenarios can also provide a useful insight in the formulation of the design’s modularity principles. On the other hand, to do it with two-row shapes or bigger, such as the [11:321], the initial grid needs to be extended to at least m:(3, 3) dimensions. As depicted in Figure 43, using an m:(3, 3) configuration, we tested the fullest occupation scenario in diverse urban settings. Working from a full occupation scenario, it can be assured that less intensive setups, with shapes with less modules, can too function if given similar constraints. Finally, following the purpose of testing junctions, the shapes should overlap somehow, that is, they could not be discretized in relation to one another in terms of their grid positioning, otherwise that would be equivalent of considering them autonomously with no junction function. As a secondary consequence, the combination of these rules implied a symmetrical configuration of the typologies in tridimensional space. The exercise eventually allowed to extract some previously unnoticed aspects, that are related with the maximum number of feasible consecutive modules and their spatial relations regarding d. In these m:(3, 3) grid circumstances, the most limited scenario (Figure 43c) is where the double dwelling blocks are in an attached urban setting, meaning there is only one free façade facing the exterior where it is possible for d1 or d2 to occur. In this case, it was verified that a void must be left open in the center of the m:(3, 3) grid, functioning as an interior patio, allowing d. In this circumstances, where only the center modules are left free, there are only two possible m:(3, 3) arrangements.

One uses a [11:3] and a [11:321,3] combined, while the other uses [11:321] shapes with different rotations ((4) and (5) in Figure 43c). As to the second most constrained case (Figure 43b), the modules can be feasibly distributed to occupy the entire grid space. Unlike in the previous scenario, in this case, with full occupation there was no need to release the center module of the equation. In this circumstances, the feasible junctions are the [11:322:3]•[11:323] and the [11:321:3]•[11:3]. Finally, as to the least constrained scenario, in a detached setup (Figure 43a), it is possible to combine both the [11:321,3]•[11:322], the [11:322:3]•[11:323] and the [11:321:3]•[11:3].

204

Figure 43. Maximum occupation cases of simple junctions in a double dwelling scenario (dwelling a and b) of m:(2, 3) shapes under different urban constraints: (a) detached, (b) semi-detached and/or semi-attached and (c) attached—d0, d1 and d2 correspond to the number of walls with possible direct contact with exterior, dashed lines represent unfeasible modules and thick lines the dn walls. Without loss of generalization, in this case we illustrate only examples with equal areas, and thus with symmetrical shapes. Numbers (1), (2) and (3) depart from the same base illustrated in the (a) respective cases. In (c), numbers (4) and (5) are illustrate the ways out of the d induced constraints with a void central module. In thick lines are eventual façades with d and in dashed line are impossibilities due to d constraints.

We can move to a generalization of the previous observations when questioning the limits of joining consecutive modules in terms of their least as possible relation with their d1 or d2 conditions. The rationale thus must leave the m:(2, 3) derived shapes and consider the modules in a more abstract sense. For this, considerations must depart from external constraints, namely in legal aspects determining the minimum salubrity conditions. In that respect, we based our developments on the Portu- guese legislation, that defines that when a room area is greater than or equal to 15m2, the depth must be smaller than twice the width, except when the two opposite walls further apart have openings, notwithstanding that it must be possible to inscribe within a circle of diameter with no less than 2,70m. From here, the maximum feasible linear shape—i.e. of a m:(1, u) kind—satisfying our modular conditions is a four-module shape (Figure 44). Disregarding legal considerations, it would still make sense to integrate this kind of proportion constraints in practical terms, since it becomes a very difficult exercise to allocate main functional areas requiring d when too many modules do not have a single d. The principle is sustained in a m:(1, u) grid, but we can generalize it to other grids. So, consider a m:(v, u) grid, where both u and v are positive

205

Figure 44. Linear limits given d constraints. integers, and u ≥ v, and that we incrementally increase u and v a unitary step at a time. In these conditions, we conclude that when both values are simultaneously bigger than 4, that it becomes extremely hard (most likely impossible), to attribute a functionality to certain spaces within a dwelling, since these cannot benefit from at least a d1. In this respect, we could eventually overcome this proportion constraint if we considered aggregation of pairs of modules. However, in practice this would mean that spaces were being set off scale, perhaps solving a problem, but creating spatial imbalances. Particularly, we would be going against the spatial-dimensional characteristics of the design system as it was conceived, and probably we would have to reconsider it deeply. From here we conclude that the maximum feasible grid for a single dwelling theoretically is m:(4, u), with u ≤ 4. Most modern housing examples rarely, if ever, reach these theoretical limits. Indeed, we conjecture that in general most grids, as so considered from the observation of spaces of primary functional attribution, present a m:(2, u) configuration, or at most a m:(3, u) configuration. In older examples, we can find deeper typologies, particularly in dense urban scenarios, that may attain m:(4, u) dimensions, but rarely more, and if so with skylights included, and anyhow not fulfilling modern requirements. From a sustainability point of view, the relation between external surface areas and internal volume/area must not be overlooked when combining different shapes. As this relation increases, it also augments the potential for d exchanges. These may be desirable from certain perspectives, e.g. aesthetically or by contributing for a saner spatial environment. However, these may also pose more constructive issues—e.g. water-tightness, breathability/air-tightness, and so forth. Thus, they potentially have more construction risk factors and more costs associated—e.g. internal partitions within a larger volume are cheaper than building an equivalent number of external walls. Moreover, energeti- cally it is a known fact that the more compactness in a building—understood as the least degree of external surface in relation to interior volume, which is optimal in a sphere—the more the interior volume will theoretically be protected from unwanted energy transfers.

206 5.4.7 THEORETICAL GRID CONSTRAINTS There are infinite possibilities to establish grids and shapes within these, as starting from just one

0:w shape-module [11] in a m:(1, 1) grid, we could reach a shape such as [1:v1:u] in a m:(v, u) grid. Nonetheless, there are limitations that are related with factors such as d, as well as economy or feasibility, that constrain the maximum acceptable volume dimensions.

In a [11] shape, the four façades and the roof can be opened. When it gets to a [11:2], only 6 facades out of 8 possible sides are available, and in a [11:3] there are 8 out of 12, and so forth. In the most basic case, where we have a shape (s) of the size of the module (m) there are 4 total (t) façades, each corresponding to a possibility of direct light or ventilation (d). However, when growing in grid size and dimensions it may be useful to assess these figures in a clarified form, as presented in the expressions bellow (Figure 45).

expression for 3D (u, v, w), 2D (u, v, 1), or 1D (u, 1, 1; if u≥2)

(a) modules (m) muvw=uvw

(b) total sides (t) tuvw=w(2uv+u+v)

(d) d modules duvw=2w(u+v-2)

(e) d sides dsuvw=2w(u+v)

(f) d sides with 5th façade (d5) ds5uvw=2w(u+v)+uv (g) side connections (c) c=t-d (h) side connections with 5th façade (c5) c5= t5-d5

Figure 45. Expressions for assessment of different grid scenarios.

5.4.8 ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM CIRCULATION In the first typological test of the system into a multi-story housing building, we have implied an expansion of the grid. In the example (Figure 46), we can observe a building design that uses a m:(3, 4), formed by u:(8, 7), analogous to dimensions used in the AHP. The expansion to a m:(3, 4) is due to a self-imposed constraint of trying to keep as much as possible the m:(2, 3) derived shapes, to which it must be added further modules to address common circulation functions within the building. In the example, the two center modules are allocated to common circulation, and in level 0 there is even a third module to provide access from the exterior to the central circulation area. All the shapes are wrapped around it, which means that all their modules can have a d connection. The

0 exercise led to the [11:32131:2] shape (orange diagram) that already differed from the m:(2, 3) derived shapes, using instead a m:(3, 3) grid. That could have been overcome by dividing that shape in two smaller

207 Figure 46. Illustration of a basic case of multi-story adaptation, where it was necessary to add an exception to the m:(2,3) shapes in level 0.

Figure 47. Unwrapping minimum circulation area in (a), (b) and (c), and circulation schematics in (d) and (e).

0 0 0 0 0 0 ones, in a [11:321] •[31:2] , [12:3] •[112131:2] or [11:3] •[2131:2] , but option was to assume a bigger typology so to test additional circulation issues. Given the characteristics of this case, in each level the shapes could be, so to say, unwrapped to form a linear shape with the same topological characteristics in terms of their relation with the main circulation areas within (Figure 47). If we generalize the procedure, we can say that the main circulation areas correspond to the minimum circulation area, that is, the least area that allows access all main functional areas within a dwelling shape (kitchen, living room, dining room, bedrooms). This does not need to be explicitly established, such as in a corridor space. Instead, it can be implicit within a space, such as when crossing a living room to access a bedroom, just as in the second row of the shape in the example (Figure 47a). Whether or not explicit, a minimum circulation can be defined as a derivative of the minimum legal width established for corridor space developed across a definable length. In the actual design development, we have considered two types of horizontal circulation. One with net width of 1.1m, and the other, for hall areas, with a net width of 1.5m to allow wheelchair accessibility. However, for these methodological observations, to simplify area measurement purposes, we considered a gross area, with the measure from the external side of a module’s 0.3m thick external wall, to the internal side of a 0.1m thick partition wall defining a corridor, for a total gross width of 1.5m and a net corridor width of 1.1m.

208

Figure 48. Minimum circulation in the enhanced AHP shapes.

30%

25% 24.1% 20.8% 20% 18.1%

15% 12.7%

10% 6.5% 5% 4.9%

0% (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k)

Figure 49. Percentages relation of the minimum circulation areas depicted in Figure 48.

209 As modules increase in size, the percentage of minimum circulation area decreases in proportion. However, if module’s get bigger, as in Figure 47e, this may signify that the main circulation areas must unfold further to assure functionality, thus partially losing what would be the eventual gains. In our case, since each module roughly corresponds to a main functional area (one-to-one), this is not an issue (Figure 47d). Instead, from the one-to-one main functional allocation criteria, we can assume that in an optimized solution, each strip of minimum circulation area can serve two main function areas, thus reducing a theoretical 31.2% circulation percentage of the total area, to half (i.e. 15.6%) (Figure 47d). If we apply the same methodology to m:(2, 3) shapes with u:(8, 8), we can observe some patterns that enlighten on what an acceptable minimum circulation area can be in relation with the total area of the modules (Figure 48). To assess it, we have tested every m:(2, 3) shapes in every possible entrance point, and distributed circulation zones across the diverse modules so that, from that point, a minimum path could be established to every module in each of the considered shapes. For simplification purposes, we have discarded the redundant shapes resulting from rotation or reflection, and instead opted for representing their reflection axis and notating their unfolding possibilities. In these circumstances, the results indicate that the minimum circulation mostly varies between around 10% and 18%. Of these, the largest share is located between around 12.5% and 15%. Further detailing may lower these values. Nonetheless, it can be conjectured their reasonability as a benchmark for reference of future developments (Figure 49).

5.4.9 FUNCTIONAL MAPPING STRATEGIES As we increasingly clarify a design, we also become closer to a way of describing it algorithmically, that is, through a set of rules that given an input can produce an output. In the AHP, we have distributed the housing program upon a shape or combination of shapes, over which finer adjustments followed, in a roughly intuitive process. The starting point of that kind of approach is a formal desire. However, the underlying logic of an algorithmic description works inversely, that is, form is raised from the specification of an elementary structure of relations. These are ought to speak a logical language, which may be far from intuitive. This raises the need to use a different approach. The way to do it seems to be from an architectural program starting point387, in this case, a housing program, that is emanated from a brief. By defining a set of needs, transcribed in a system-constrained housing program, one can start on building the functional relations, independently of how intricate the design is. Final shape will be accomplished by successively building up these relations and will be terminated when all the housing program ele ments are fitted and specific formal issues are met. The logic is analogous to establishing a functional mapping to assess a product modularity. That is, we can outline the topological relations between different functional zones of a design but only insofar as they are in a scope that we can define, i.e. in the measure of the detailing we need or want to achieve.

210 Figure 50. Algorithm development flowchart.

(a) (b) (c) primary allocation label secondary allocation label circulation label base module O supplement (storage, pantry, etc.) S horizontal circulation C kitchen K toilet T entrance hall space H bedroom B vertical circulation (stairs) V living room L kitchen I dining room D Table 10. Functional labelling, to note that, given its specificity and range of different sizes (from full module to half module) the Kitchen is here considered both for primary (as K) and secondary (as I) allocation.

Our housing program constrains were developed to define the total number of admissible house compartments corresponding to a typology. We had previously clarified the modular scope, thus setting the modular constraints input. Then, from a user inputted brief, we can inform a two-fold primary functional allocation stage, with a part specifically for allocation and the other to establish topological relations. The output of this part is what informs shape assembly at a modular scope. If we want to detail it further, we need to proceed to the secondary functional allocation. The primary, secondary and circulation spaces that are considered for a housing program requirement within our design system, as well as their corresponding labels, are shown in Table 10. Following a principle of modularity, we have defined that at a primary level we allocate a main functional space to each module m of an m:(2, 3) scope. In a subsequent step, secondary functional spaces are to be allocated within each of these main functional spaces. The secondary spaces S and T, are admissible within any primary space; I only admissible in K; and V only within O and only if a second level is required. The circulation spaces are not assignable, as they can be functionally defined by exclusion of the remaining primary and secondary functional allocation. Nevertheless, these have a key role in the definition of dimensional constraints that integrate both the primary and secondary functional spheres. The total number of modules (m) required by a housing brief are defined with function to bedrooms in the house, here named with the expression tb —standing for typology and number of bedrooms within. Following the methodology, rules for primary functional assignment can thus be defined (Table 11). With this set of rules, and given an inputted housing brief, it becomes possible to compute a primary housing program for functional assignment. Without loss of generalization, based on the previous set of rules, we have manually computed the results only for the simpler one level case house in a m:(2, 3) grid (Table 12).

211 1: For each B in tB (except t0), m must be at least per B: m=1 per K: m=1 per L: m=1 except if L and D are not differentiated, then m(L+D)=1 per D: m=1 except if L and D are not differentiated, then m(L+D)=1

2: In terms of tb definition, maximum number of m for each B in tB comprehends a maximum of (except in t0)

per B: m=2 meaning that for a certain of tb there is only one master-bedroom considered (i.e. a B with m=2). If there is more

than one master-bedroom with m=2, then tb increases level to tb+1, meaning there is only one master-bedroom for

the B value of a tb considered per K: m=1 per L: m=1 per L: m=1 3: Minimum number of levels per house is 1 4: Maximum number of levels per house is 2 5: Per level, minimum m=2 6: Per level, maximum m=6 Table 11. Primary design brief assignment rules.

typology number of modules base program t0 t0 min 2 (O, K) t0 - - t0 max 3 (O, K, B) t1 t1 min 3 (O, K, B) t1 4 (O, K, B, L) t1 max 5 (O, K, B, L, D) t2 t2 min 4 (O, K, B, B) t2 5 (O, K, B, B, L) t2 max 6 (O, K, B, B, L, D) t3 t3 min 5 (O, K, B, B, B) t3 - - t3 max 6 (O, K, B, B, B, L) t4 t4 min 6 (O, K, B, B, B, B) t4 - - t4 max - - Table 12. Primary housing program for a simple one level house, given Table 11 rules and a m:(2, 3) grid.

The subsequent step of program assignment is to use this information (Table 12) as input to its placement within modules, which calls for further rules defining the relative positioning of each functionally allocated module. The minimum tb, the t0 min, is also the base for allocation of further modules. Since modules will be positioned in a m:(2, 3) grid, the O is placed centrally in a [12] position, and the K contiguously in a [11] position. Remaining rules for this stage are shown in Figure 51. More than the specific rules that are being portrayed, the formalism that is applied serves the methodological purpose of showing how this kind rationale can be further implemented. The formalism we have used is not associated with any specific programming language. Instead, it simply describes what would be the main lines for primary functional allocation purposes in modularly defined shapes under the devised design system. Using a similar formalism, we can transform an outputted matrix of this algorithm into a set of topological relations between main functions, which define the general circulation flows in the typology.

212 Figure 51. Algorithm structure to generate a random primary functional allocation from a given brief, for a generic case of a single level typology of an m:(2, 3) scope.

213 Figure 52. Algorithm structure for conversion of functional allocation into topological relations for a simple case of a single level typology.

Figure 53. Example of derivation the set of rules for allocation (a) and topology (b), for a case given a O, K, B, B, L, D brief input.

Since shapes and sub-shapes are clarified in the modular design, we would not have to develop a full algorithm for shape creation, as it would have to be, for instance, in a shape grammar fashion388. Instead, shapes will be a consequence of a clarified functional mapping acting on the previously defined modules’ physical and dimensional features, i.e. a primary functional allocation. This will define the shape’s broad volumetric features, over which we can further detail the internal elements, i.e. a secondary functional allocation. Secondary spaces are describable as subsets of the primary spaces. These must follow their own dedicated brief, and obey a hierarchy of allocation. Each house requires an I, a T and an S as minimum secondary spaces. Given its specificity, the kitchen is considered both as a primary (labelled K) and a secondary (labelled I) space. The number of I (i.e. the iI) thus comes in first and is always iI=1. It follows the number of T, that can be defined it in relation to the number of B, where iTmax=iB, iTmin=(iB-

1) for 2≤iB≤3 or iTmin=(iB-2) for iB≥3, and finally in a t0 typology, iT=1. As to the number of S, every typology has an iSmin=1. For further cases, we can define it in relation to T, where 1≤iS≤(1+iTmax- iTmin). The output conjunction of these elements is the brief of the secondary functional spaces.

214 Finally, the spatial integration of the primary and secondary elements follows the dimensional constraints imposed by the circulation spaces (H and C). The distinction H and C is due to the different minimum dimensional requirements of each—1.5×1.5m for H, and a 1.1m width for C. Both can be defined either implicitly or explicitly. Implicitly means that they can occur integrated in a wider space than its own minimum dimensional requirements, for instance they occur via an L space—e.g. the L in Figure 41c when moving from the entrance to the stairs. In this sense, H or C will be implicit within any primary functional space. Explicitly means they go from a module to another through a third module, thus having to physically separate the functional space from C—e.g. in Figure 41d or Figure 41e. This is also what occurs between a primary and a secondary space. Thus, explicit circulation is defined as from a secondary space, whereas the implicit circulation is non-definable. Finally, in terms of housing brief, H has the specificity of occurring only once, and thus has to be associated with a module or a pair of modules which are closer to a certain requested entrance direction, definable through a precedent input.

5.4.10 THE MULTISTORY BUILDING Throughout the work, we have already been showing some of the tested multi-story buildings and their implications. The system proved to have a wide variety of possible applications. In a rural context, the terrain dimensions may not constitute a major problem. Conversely, in urban spaces, this is typically a core issue. Indeed, given the higher land prices in urban settings, it matters to explore architectural solutions enhancing spatial and aesthetical qualities, and that at the same time look out with versatility for an optimized use of land. The initial structural technology, using CFS elements, roughly withstands 4 or 5 levels, and thus the multistory typological studies targeted it389. In the first studied cases, the focus was on the single-family housing units with a maximum of two floors. A solution was developed that started from a maximum implantation polygon that allowed an elevated number of associations, both as isolated building and a compact urban solution. While in the first cases a direct connection from the street to the interior of the house was possible, in the case of the multi-story collective dwellings it is necessary to use complementary modules, such as common staircases and elevators, to assure this connection from the street to the dwelling interior. In this case, a few variations of some classical building distributions were developed, namely option with direct entrance from a common hall (i.e. left right apartment building type) and gallery type. As expected, given the modular characteristics, the typological explorations of direct entrance cases proved to be feasible with minor adaptations. In the first case (Figure 54b), a central core is used to make the vertical connections within the building. Here all the living modules are directly facing the exterior, and so can benefit of d. The implementation is possible both with u:(8, 8) as with

215 u:(8, 7) modules. However, the latter requires some adjustments to assure a sound functional allocation. The ideal scenario is nonetheless the u:(8, 8), which as we knew assures symmetry at an optimum degree. At an urban level, since this type of building only allows facade superposition in the external corners of the building—where the modules are of a d2 kind, thus when superposed reducing to a still feasible d1 kind—its use with contiguous buildings would be limited, therefore requiring some degree of plot isolation. The second tested case of direct entrance (Figure 54a) was a symmetrical arrangement of two m:(3, 3) zones, intermediated by a core of m:(2, 1) set for common areas plus, a third module which can be freely attached to any of the main blocks of modules. The first verification was that of the five modules that can potentially connect with the vertical core, only a maximum of four simultaneous direct entrances from the same common hall are possible. The main differences with the first case are that not every module can connect directly with the exterior. Moreover, a wider spectrum of shapes is allowed, with more possible combinations. Finally, using either a u:(8, 8) or a u:(8, 7) does not imply significant layout changes. Anyhow, as in the previous case, some adaptations were needed. Namely, there is a shape junction that may be particularly prone to use direct stairs. As in the previous building, the urban use of this solution is limited to isolated plots. Finally, two solutions of gallery distribution were studied, the first using an external type of gallery (Figure 54c1), the second implementing a mirrored variation of the first in terms of common circulation areas (Figure 54c2). Aside this difference, both are essentially analogous solutions. The detailed gallery solution (Figure 55 and Figure 56), proved to have quite a direct application of the m:(2, 3) shapes, working either with an u:(8, 7) or a u:(8, 8). It allows parallel junctions, both horizontally and vertically, as well as misaligned junctions between floors within the same dwelling fraction. Moreover, it is quite easy to create excavated verandas in every floor and/or patios in the top floors. It is quite reasonable to think of an endless expansion of the length of this building, making it extremely feasible for urban implementation either if is in isolated or laterally closed plots.

216

Figure 54. Multi-story diagrams.

Figure 55. External gallery solution diagram.

217

Figure 56. Detailed gallery solution.

218

5.5 The prototype

5.5.1 MODULARITY, CONSTRUCTION AND SUSTAINABILITY The array of hypotheses within a modular system underlays a dimensional regulation which has production control purposes, while still enabling a great deal of exploratory latitude. These principles are, to a great extent, lined up with the 1960’s much in vogue modular research and standards creation, or even earlier research. However, these principles do not necessarily make sense today. Indeed, current technologies, such as CNC, automation, or 3D printing, enable a more feasible production of non-standard material dimensions than it used to in the past. Nonetheless, normalized sizes are still cheaper in most cases due to their larger production scales. For instance, in the case of OSB boards used in the prototype construction, these are provided in standardized dimensions by the manufacturer. Depending on the intents, the boards can be used in their original sizes, or be cut-to-fit the specifications. However, cutting can hardly occur without producing some sort of material waste, and not without energy consumption in the cutting, trimming or screwing machines, or not without involving labor time. The same analogously applies for most materials used in the construction. Whereas some materials have a greater reuse or recycling potential than others, waste production in result of the construction process is nonetheless unavoidable. Furthermore, given multiple factors and even if best intended so, deconstruction for repair and maintenance or after life-cycle end of a building is hardly a clean-cut process. Among other reasons, this contributes for a non-correspondence between the reuse and/or recycling potential of a certain material (if used by itself or combined with other) and the verifiable reuse and/or recycling rate. The case of steel is a good example in this domain, since it has a nearly 100% recycling potential. Downstream a likely more optimized, large-scale production plant, any of these operations will have their cost increased. As we have verified during the prototype development, under the current technological stage, even if attempting to follow these modular principles to the extreme, construction without these sort of costs is but a utopia. Indeed, one of the initial goals set for the construction was to make it with the least waste as possible. To some extent, that can be achieved in a design stage, attempting to exhaustively predict it. However, when facing some construction issues, the exercise is not always easy to put in practice. Furthermore, when adding further criteria such as for the construction components to be easily transportable, including considering their fitting into ship containers, and thereby further limiting the maximum dimension of the components, the number of variables necessarily increase and it becomes harder to keep track of waste. Nonetheless, mitigation measures in this respect, such as those embodied by lean production principles, can be implemented. There is a break-even threshold between what may be useful practices to improve the design or the construction, and the time or money investment it takes to get to

219 it. The design process is a dynamic process, and such break-even is often hard to understand on the go. Furthermore, in some contexts it is just better to keep on using ordinary, time validated procedures, and not rushing in implement cutting-edge innovations. As history tells us, good tools and practices are typically the result of a slow evolutionary path, where social or technical assessment and recognition takes its time to test and eventually settle. The u grid was theoretically optimized for a cold-formed steel structure, and though of in terms of an easy adaptation to a multitude of standardized materials to use inside or outside the house. None- theless, the typological architectural principles it gave birth to could have also been feasibly used with different structural elements, i.e., the same design system can be used with a different kind of structure. Such is certainly in debt to the abstract character of the design exercise, which in turn ascribes to a topological nature of the modular device. Divergences between the exercise level, and some of the technological peculiarities of the construction, would only arise in a late stage, during the prototype construction. Some of these would contradict the initial constraints, and if had been previously known, the initial design principles would likely had been devised differently. Anyhow, at some point, the approach inevitably became independent of constructive constraints.

5.5.2 BUILDING THE PROTOTYPE A proof-of-concept building, full-scale prototype was built out of the AHP design. The development of more detailed building drawings went through several stages, with natural advances and setbacks. Built by the Coolhaven company, the prototype solution was based on the most requested typology (3 bedroom detached house), like the illustrated case in Figure 25, yet using u:(8, 8) dimensions. A multidisciplinary team worked together for this purpose. A close work had to be developed with the architecture and the different specialized contributions, as well as with the industry. The greatest transversal concern among all the participants was to confer the best possible sustainability to the project, which included energy efficiency simulations, lifecycle assessments, fire and stability tests. This included meetings with several suppliers set to develop innovative solutions, from special semi-transparent solar panels to eventually use in the façades, to the consideration of different domotic systems, efficient water heating systems, or the use of phase-changing materials to improve the buildings’ thermal behavior. For several reasons, not all solutions ended up being applied. Moreover, inherent difficulties and incongruences were found during the final planning and construction process. These were mainly due to the prototypical and experimental character of the design and to the need to present visible results within a tight schedule, in which the typically slower pace of research has a hard time to follow.

220 Besides the aspects which are normally taken in consideration in any building, such as orientation and spatial qualities, several principles guided the concerns from the start. Aside implementing envi- ronmentally sound technologies, the building was to show the potential of different spatial layout arrangements. These had to be coordinated with a proof of ease of installations maintenance handling. To attain it, the kind of materials considered were to be apt for both construction and partial deconstruction to enable access to dedicated piping and wiring. Another concern was for the building parts to be optimized for containerization, that is, considering a virtual 2D deconstruction of the building parts. Finally, the building had to meet the expectations that the technology and processes in use, comparatively with current construction methods, would not only significantly reduce the total construction period, but evidently also turn it cost-competitive. Overall, the prototype served not only as proof of the set targets, but as test the very limits of what conceptually had been defined, going beyond them as it was feasibly possible. The devised principles established that, structurally, the construction would be made of independent, cube-like modules, like a tridimensional cube made of post and beam set side-by-side. The structure it is as if a tridimensional frame, made of composed post and beams, whose corners are laid in a rammed steel piles foundation and can be staked upon each other. Since such foundation only leaves a few visible spots in the ground, it dramatically minimizes the building’s footprint, allowing a total ground reestablishment in case of future deconstruction (better only if mobile). Cold-formed steel parts are used to make the composed posts and beams. Since steel is priced by weight, arguably, these have a competitive cost over hot-rolled steel profiles, since they are lightweight comparatively. Yet in the end, these also require a higher processing, which in non-automated manufacturing environments may, in the end, result costlier. Being also an experimental structure, the initially proposed structural design ended up requiring additional bracing on the corner junctions, to better withstand lateral forces. Initially, one of the ideas for the column design, besides keeping it a minimum to maximize free wall space, was to make it somehow has a hollow and accessible shape in order to fit required installations within it. In the end, although applied, given a higher amount of installations than initially expected, its effectiveness was more reduced than anticipated. Despite the difficulties, and of some degree of constructive experimentalism, which ultimately lead to solutions that could only be optimized in subsequent projects, it took only three months to complete the construction, which can be regarded as a great improvement, considering the rough average estimates for the Portuguese reality. If compared with other approaches worldwide, it is our belief that, in optimized circumstances, the design potentially would take just two or three weeks to be fully built since design completion.

221

Figure 57. Prototype construction, (a,d) ground floor structure, (b,c) infrastructure through structure, (e) vapor barrier, (f) exhaustion through structure, (g,i,j) stairs, (h) first floor structure (cont.)

222

223

224

Figure 57 (cont). Prototype construction, (k) OSB over structure, (m) finishing external layer (l,n) concluded raw elements.

225 5.6 Revisiting the prototype

5.6.1 THE COMPANY The business structure of the company created after the AHP project, has gone through several changes since its inceptions. This results from many factors, but with economics in the lead. The core activity output has changed in concordance with a new market focus. The company has been moving away from a turnkey concept, which was its initial business focus. The CEO’s words sum it up: “the turnkey is a nightmare... its logistics is a nightmare… the customer is a nightmare”. On the one hand, old, enrooted constructive habits, more or less artisanal, are part of a constructive culture that ends up being a great source of inertia to the realization of the projects. Furthermore, residential house client’s indecisions, change of mind, or lack of assertiveness, meant too much resources can be entropically lost, diverged to activities that add no value to the outputs, and thus to the business itself. Another important change that took place is the moving away from an environmental sustainability focus, particularly in the field of energy and life-cycle R&D. At one point, it became clear that the investment to obtain competitive solutions in this domain was out of the scale that the company could support. There would still be left the ‘green’ marketing, which, however, proved to have limited effectiveness. In a business perspective, in the first instance, this may even be appealing, connecting the customer. However, when the critical moment comes for client decision-making, it all seems to fall on the economic component. Sustainable practices are nonetheless hardwired in the company’s backbone, at least in its continuous search for optimizing constructive solutions. Given that “the sustainability that matters first is that of the company”, as referred by the CEO, they ended up looking for a focus on the skills and markets that could bring greatest benefits. In agreement, it is their belief that those in Portugal looking for prefab solutions are mainly looking to economize in relation to more ordinary constructive solutions. In fact, for better or worse, the price-point is the typical focus marketing strategies of prefab companies in Portugal. Anyhow, that is not a guar- anty for the customer, since the final cost has many other aspects to take in consideration besides the design system or the structural philosophy. The company is currently focusing on the R&D of modular components for a business-oriented clientele, thus now positioned more as industry suppliers than as contractors. As consequence, the national market plays a secondary role now. Instead, they are exporting to European countries with stronger economies, particularly for France. The focus is on 2D constructive solutions (panel construction or the like) and no longer 3D (volumetric) as they had equated at a certain point. The latter, which they tested, essentially posed logistical difficulties that drastically reduced the competitiveness potential of such solutions.

226 Figure 58. Robot manufacturing modular panels. Robot #1: (a) loading substructure; (b) deploying substructure to place; (c) loading board; (d), (e) deploying board. Robot #2: (f) fastening board to substructure.

Anyhow, at the core of the company subsists an idea of modularity. However, they also note the difficulty of implementing modularity in some contexts. That has particularly occurred when they had to adapt their modular solutions to projects that had been developed independently and without any though in that perspective. They affirm that the cost of their products is not necessarily higher nor lower than ordinary solutions. Nonetheless they believe they can attain high standards while delivering within demanding production scales. The highly adaptable modular 2D solutions they develop are able to be incorporated into different architectural programs—they have built houses, but also schools and nursing homes. Moreover, these are also highly prone to industrialize, attested by development of an experimental robot technology for panel manufacturing (Figure 58). Nevertheless, investment plays a huge role in industrializing practices, and financing not always goes as desired. For instance, they intend to acquire a steel profiling machine, so they could be more independent from suppliers, but they have not managed to do it yet because of the high financial engagement required. Ironically, since they are mostly working with markets with stronger economies, one of their current competitive advantages seems to be the comparatively lower labor cost.

5.6.2 THE PROTOTYPE Aside being in and of itself a showroom of the company’s products and services—a house-in- display—the building also became the firm’s headquarters. It is from there that both management and design teams have their main base to workout decisions. There have been some minor changes in the layout, with a partial glass enclosing of the space corresponding to a living room in the ground floor, making it more sound-proof to have meetings and the like. In the exterior, there has also been some minor changes, namely in the pavements connecting to the entrance. Anyhow, the building has

227 withstood both program and physical changes with ease. On its own, this validates the intentions of flexibility and adaptability that had been set forth since early design stages. Overall, in its daily use, space distribution and area proportions seem to satisfy its users. Denoting it, an unscheduled visit showed that although it is clearly a busy workspace, particularly in the level 1, seemingly fitting the needs comfortably. The level 0 areas, with more of a social character, also seems to satisfy for a coffee or lunch break, or for informal meetings. The kitchen space has notoriously been appropriated, with some domestic appliances included—a coffee machine, a microwave and a fridge—as well as a table and chairs, and some other objects, such as cups, magnets or a plant, overall giving it a domestic, personalized character. From a constructive point of view, there are few things to point out. The foundations solution (point by point piles, that had been opted to minimize the use of concrete and to favor LCE deconstruction) have had a slight give way. Nevertheless, that has been swiftly solved, and did not carry relevant consequences, given the relative flexibility of the structure and the main materials. With this exception, at the level of constructive pathologies, there is nothing to point out, demonstrating the resilience of the constructive solutions adopted. From the thermal behavior point of view, the prototype seems to satisfy its users, both in winter and summer. The feature taken as key in this domain are the efficiency of the window frames, allied with the air renovation system that uses underground stable temperature to deliver a controlled, energy efficient, air circulation. In a summer context, the effectiveness of outdoor shading is the point mentioned. However, there are complaints about the fragility of the screens that do it from the exterior, because they seem to easily escape from their guides, and must be collected when stronger winds occur—in fact, in the north façade they are permanently raised. The use of higher thermal inertia materials in some strategic places, namely as a surface plate laying over the floor structure, right beneath the pavement, is also perceived as having a positive role. Anyhow, overall, fears associated with negative impacts of a construction making mostly use of low thermal inertia materials so far have been proven wrong. The acoustics also seems to satisfy, both from external noises, as from internal propagation. The materials, with a high thickness of thermal/acoustic insulation both from the outside, as in between floors and main partitions, are certainly contributors to this aspect. The issue of floor vibration due to the use more flexible materials, which is often taken as a negative aspect in this kind of construction, does not seem to bother users much. In fact, we only feel it if we are standing still and someone jumps somewhere. Users are used to the normal vibrations of walking, and thus they do not notice it. Moreover, there are no noises attached, no scrapping or squeaking sounds, which minimizes eventual negative impacts in this matter.

228

Figure 59. Finalized prototype.

229

230 III Practical Conclusions on a (Pre)Fabricated Architecture

Here we will sum up aspects that we consider to likely have an impact in the development and implementation of house prefabrication practices. Whereas some of these can be directly discernable from the elements described throughout the thesis, others derive from historical and socio-cultural related aspects390 that are only referred in the Annex Volume, or from conclusions arising from the development and construction of the house prototype. The concern was to depict stricter aspects of prefabrication and modular construction related with housing purposes, but also to reflect aspects of a broader scope of the building and architectural activity that hopefully contribute to a better and more holistic understanding of the problematics.

1 ON AN IDEA OF PREFABRICATION

A broad-term. Throughout history, there is a wide diversity of house prefabrication examples, making it a rich field of exploration, but also making it harder to extract unequivocal assumptions on a definition or a corpus of knowledge on the subject391. As any building practice, different options in the diverse stages must be considered. Prefabrication scope must be defined in each case. As a broad-term, prefabrication can be mistaken with terms such as systems construction, rationalized construction, standardization, industrialized construction, and so forth. Although generally embedding the spirit of these, when making use of the term, it primarily matters to specify the scope of the respective approach. Prefabrication has been associated both with positive and negative aspects. Positive aspects are often related with state-of-the-art construction practices and/or a techno optimist attitude. Negative connotations are normally related with socially stigmatized examples, arising from low-standard practices, associated construction pathologies, and so forth.

231

2 TERRITORIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Construction environments. There are different construction cultures at a country and/or regional level, with roots usually traceable to natural conditions, vernacular built forms, or socio-cultural practices in the respective territories. Socially recognizable archetypes. Likewise, the use and acceptability of different materials and forms can have territorial variations based on socially recognizable archetypes, or on more or less clarified ideas of tradition. This affects aspects such as quality perception, and eventually undermines the development of new or innovative solutions at an aesthetical or constructive level. Political frames. The political conditions can too vary country and/or regionally wise. This affects aspects such as the potential risks and benefits of construction investment, namely in political/fiscal uncertainty, attitude towards investment, enforceability of contracts, or eventual in- centives. Administrative issues. Bureaucracy, communication and transportation networks, legal aspects, administrative machines, social and work conditions, or general economic environment, are also aspects to address when considering different territorial realities. Building regulations. Technically, attention is required in exporting or adopting imported systems, namely in some regulations specificities, such as fire and earthquake, and so forth.

3 ECONOMY AND VALUE

Main variables of the economy/value equation. The competitiveness of any economic activity is subjected to an economy and value relation, which can be measured in the intersection of the output vectors of quality and scope, cost and time. Likewise, the overall architectural equation is subjected to a ponderation of both its delivered quality—which can be understood as value for client—and economy related factors, in order to deliver the envisioned design/constructive purposes in a satisfying manner. Output vectors: quality and scope, cost and time. Quality and scope are interrelated elements that can generally be defined as desirable aspects of a product. Things well made can be said of having quality. Their features, or what they may induce, such as intrinsic characteristics and/or, eventually, their optional aspects, can be referred as scope. Cost and time are also bounded elements that can be defined as non-desirable aspects, thus constraining the quality and scope. Typically, there is a direct correspondence between quality/scope and cost/time. The million- dollar question is how to increase quality/scope in a greater degree than the cost/time.

232 Contextualizing variables. No single factor in the overall building equation should be considered independently. For instance, material cost does not correspond to final cost after the building is concluded—e.g. bricklaying can be expensive from a labor perspective, although bricks themselves can be relatively inexpensive. Indeed, aside direct costs, labor or time related factors, such as workers income, safety, building site management, or overall production logistics, are also to take in consideration, influencing in the economy, and consequently in the quality of the building product. Competitiveness factors. Satisfactory answers to attain an economically competitive edge in construction processes must address aspects such as labor replacement, logistics and quality issues. In labor replacement, it must essentially be pondered which method will allow a faster final assembly time, and thus it is least voluminous/complex and/or requires least in-situ finishing. In logistics, it must essentially be pondered the in-situ storage space requirement versus just- in-time delivery capability. In quality, it matters to assure the greatest degree of finished product as possible (or OPP postponement), attaining a greater quality control on the components of the building assembly, but also knowing that the greater the postponement, the more constrained options will be.

4 COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

General reasons for commercial success. General reasons for success seem to be associated with aspects such as innovative selling schemes, knowledge of the market, or availability of choice. Business timing and opportunity can also be a decisive driver for commercial success—e.g. the mass-produced, all similar, Quonset Huts (1941-present)—or conversely the main reason for its failure—e.g. Packaged House (Wachsmann & Gropius, 1941-1952). Technical factors for commercial success. The most successful cases in terms of built units generally do not denote particularly remarkable architectural qualities or even concern for that matter (e.g. Sears Catalogue Homes, 1908-40). Anyhow, business success seems to overall be related with reliable constructive methods, and aesthetical or spatial flexibility—e.g. an open prefab system allowing different architectural design languages, or a flexible system of partitions allowing different architectural layouts, adding/removing volumetric parts, and so forth. Broad social support. Looking to places such as the USA, Japan or Scandinavia, where prefab technologies are of common use, and even considered traditional to a large extent, it is verifiable the existence of a strong social support. In the lack of such, risk of unsuccessful outcomes can increase. A sudden attempt to implement alien technologies, even if these are proven to be extremely good, will struggle to succeed.

233 Commitment and persistence from multiples actors in the building industry. Steady, continuous efforts are required to achieve design and construction quality standards, but also involving considerable investment in marketing strategies. The XIXth century pattern books are a good example on the introduction of technologies to the masses, while highlighting the relevance of publicity, showing that a broad range of skills and expertise must be involved, and that technical quality of the outputs per se is not enough. Integrated innovation and financial robustness. New technological developments in construction need to be properly framed within the existing constructive methods and construction businesses ecosystem, i.e. to be understood and accepted so to successfully be put into use. Overall, these factors put a financial pressure on prefab businesses, which will inevitably require a substantial financial support to withstand wait for an investment return. In principle, this means that the bulk of companies within the construction industry (mostly SME’s), are likely unfit to single-handedly support innovative developments in this field on a medium/long run.

5 CLIENTS’ BIAS, RESISTANCES AND PRECONCEPTIONS

Low-quality bias. Prefab biases are typically related with low-quality examples of the past, such as post-war prefabs, or concrete panel systems, which have been widely associated with construction pathologies. These occur without the knowledge of good quality examples, helping to build an uninformed negativity towards it. Aesthetical bias. Likewise, a prefab terminology associated with aesthetical features of these past examples, such as visible joints, flat roofs and the like can be suspiciously regarded. Lifestyle bias. There can also be lifestyle-related prejudice and preconceptions, as in the case of the mobile homes in the USA. Conservative spirit. There is empirical evidence of an attachment to an idea of tradition and/or a conservative spirit in housing, related with both material and aesthetical preconceptions, as illustrated through the three little pigs tale. Technically this can translate to seemingly robust materials, proper weather adequacy, fire resistance, good structural stability, and so forth. For- mal preconceptions may result from how a material form fits a certain local or regional context, but also from inculcated socio-cultural bias, and reflects a certain nostalgia of the past, as well as a sense of ontological security that is inevitably bonded in an idea of home. Likewise, a conservative attitude can also be related with what can be called the fear of the unknown, or simply a legitimate intention to express oneself within a social milieu, or not least as of making sure that a lifetime investment is proceeded satisfactorily.

234

Resistance to innovative solutions. There is thus a likelihood of bias over less conventional housing forms or seemingly more radical types of design, e.g. (hyper)modern aesthetics, unfamiliar constructive solutions. Some of it has to do with inculcated aspects, but it can also be explained by the perception that it can affect value and mortgageability. Nevertheless, the acceptability of less ordinary forms may vary with age and/or with socio-cultural background, generally with younger people and first-time buyers more open to different forms and materials. Maintenance costs expectancy. A newly built or extensively renovated house may induce a wrong expectancy that maintenance costs will not be required for many years. On the medium/long run, at a social level, this potentially causes distrust and/or lack of predisposition to engage in less ordinary solutions as they are proposed.

6 CLIENTS’ ATTRACTIVENESS FACTORS

Financing and Costs. Financing aspects (e.g. mortgageability) are typically the primal concern among clients, comparatively setting a minor relevance to design issues (e.g. aesthetics, plan layout), or technological features (e.g. construction materials, maintenance). The perspective of a lower direct capital cost, energy savings, or low investment risk due to technological features, can be persuasive arguments. Avoiding reference to past, biased examples. Generally, to attain attractive solutions, seems to be important to avoid visual reference to the examples perceived as bad in the past. Therefore, it may often be best to disguise prefabs as conventional solutions, or at least not make them explicitly like known biased types. Particularly in countries where there is no prefabrication tradition, an acceptable prefab house may be one that does not look like it is prefabricated. Location, location, location. In one way or another the adage location is everything can generally be applied as a key argument for attractiveness. Design and Space. Architectural quality, larger areas and/or more rooms are generally persuasive arguments if not meaning comparably significant extra costs. Diversity of houses and living environments. Diversity of houses, subscribing exclusivity, or of living environments, may potentially be attractive factors. Without significant loss of productive efficiency, these can be attained by providing a reasonable range of finishing’s material, enabling layout flexibility, or providing external areas in which inhabitants can adapt to their needs and wishes and so forth. Flexibility/Adaptability. There is thus eminently a demand for open, flexible and/or adaptable spaces. For instance, additional bedrooms or reasonable storage spaces may be given un- planned uses such as for office, children’s playroom, or other activities. Depending on the

235

constraints set forth by the design this can be achieved through a dimensional provision that allows ease of change overtime, through ease of dematerialization of partition walls, or by hardwiring movable elements such as partitions or furniture. Mobility/Acessibility. Further stressing flexibility/adaptability aspects, are the requirements for ease of mobility/accessibility, particularly in what concerns elderly users, or people with different sorts and degrees of handicaps. Material preferences. The material preferences are not universal. Some people may prefer solid appearance, with brick or uniform coating, others a rustic cladding with timber or stone, or instead clean looks with concrete or glass, and so forth. Generally, the young might be more amenable to unconventional solutions. Ontological security. In brief, a prefabricated house must be able to retain a feeling of ontological security, and a dwelling sense, which by no means should be inferior to other construction methods for comparable outputs.

7 PEOPLE AND THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Resistance to prefabrication. Whether using prefabrication or other methods, there is a general notion that construction processes must follow a continuous evolutive path. Nevertheless, there is a latent resistance to prefabrication related practices involving both rational and irrational biases among all the groups involved—developers, professionals, clients, purchasers, and so on. Concerns are generally based on a sense of a bad historical experience, more than with any real present evidence. Among the professionals, it can be found in those whose vision on prefabrication is not properly informed. Developers often fear compromising image and long-term value. The financial and/or insurance sectors still tend to penalize prefabrication methods over others, due to claims of greater fire risk, more susceptibility to the arousal of construction pathologies, and so forth. Despite the facts, there is no particular evidence that people share antipathy towards prefabrication per se, meaning opportunities are out there for developers to shape their businesses more like other industries, developing innovative solutions, as long as improvements can be demonstrated and backed up by suitable guarantees. Direct capital and maintenance costs perception. To a prospective house buyer the direct capital cost is typically more highly prioritized than the avoidance of future costs, since those are less visible or harder to assess when formulating a subjective notion of a good deal. Among these, the maintenance costs are particularly not greatly considered, with the general view being that a new house should have no maintenance costs unless there is something wrong with it.

236 Product/Process. Generally, the public focuses on the house primarily as a product, and the construction industry focuses on the house primarily as a process. However, there are signals of some developers seeing prefabrication as relating to the notion of product rather than process. That can be worrisome if achieved through bypassing some key development stages, related with design, the role of the client, and so forth. Reducing in-situ labor weight. There is a general notion that is necessary to reduce in-situ skilled labor weight and/or wet construction processes to improve output vectors. High-standards and reality. The generality of developers publicly claim they achieve high-standards, although commitment to innovation can be very partial among individual developers. Political drivers. In Europe, the effects of political targets, such as the 2020 Directive on the construction market, is generally regarded as an important driver for change. Hearsay truths. Developers’ assertions about the optimum house and its marketability are largely based on hearsay information that is not challenged, as time or funds lack to try alternative models. That can be particularly noticeable in some eco-friendly, or sustainable trends, which can often be more the result of marketing, than of deeply addressing the issues.

8 THE PUBLIC AND THE ARCHITECT

Aesthetical bias. More or less subjective, more or less born out of a lack of knowledge or architectural culture, architects are often biased as those that design extravagant or radical shapes, or use modern lines that have no emotional value, and so forth. Technical bias. Other biases, follow preconceptions of an eminently (pseudo)technical tone. That can be denoted in common expressions such as house with no roof is no good, or visible joints make it seem like postwar prefabs, thus probably water leaks inside, which nonetheless typically work as prosaic justifications for opting for a traditional type instead of a modern type. Anyhow, when modern forms become known by the public, they too can become objects of desire. Architectural fees myths. There is a common perception that recurring to architect’s services can be expensive or even a luxury. However, in many cases, that preconception can backfire on the very customers that opt not to use the architectural services, reflected either on the overall bill, or by qualifying buildings below acceptable standards. Subjectivity of the architectural profession. To some extent, the architectural profession is guided by intersubjective knowledge, reflected in aesthetic or stylist memes and the like, which the public not always follows (and does not have to). The prefab examples regarded positively among pairs are often related with a strongly recognizable authorship (e.g. Case Study No. 8, Charles and Ray Eames, 1945-1949) or iconic architectural projects (e.g. Habitat ’67, Moshe

237 Safdie, 1962-67). Those likely constitute a reflex of the typical architectural education of the professionals, recognition among professional pairs, or in the modes the architecture is rendered visible, mediated to the public. On the other hand, prefab that is architecturally regarded for its lack of success tends to be more socially recognizable, hence more visible among a wider audience (e.g. Khrushchovkas, 1947-61). It adds what it seems to be an absolute truth: if it is a failure, it is the architect’s fault. Professional aspirations to higher creative grounds. Most architects, if so empowered, would concentrate exclusively on the top end of the market, in higher cultural grounds that potentially provides more freedom to put ideas on the stand. Paradoxically, it seems to be in the middle sector of the market that most opportunities are available. Use of design visualization methods. Aspects dealing with spatial or use environment visualization in new or interventioned spaces are currently widespread in architectural practices, constituting an important dialogue device between client and architect, increasing the client’s perception of the proposed solutions. However, some digital ways to endorse designs still have great unexplored potential, particularly in what concerns virtual interactive environments.

9 TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

New technologies, old construction methods. Overall, aside some new materials and a certainly not neglectable implementation of digital technologies, aiding in design, production and final assembly management, for the bulk of built environment construction technologies are pretty much the same as in the post-WWII. Acknowledging long-term vs short-term technical impacts. Technical success in prefab can be determined by the degree in which a technology has seen its use spread and solidified along the years. However, it is important to acknowledge that a technological breakthrough is always a sum of different inheritances, making it difficult to trace the boundaries of an achievement, but also the extent of the influence of a certain technical improvement. Whether de facto or not so much, so-advertised technical breakthroughs392 can have positive effects in marketability, but may also be a cause of undermining the buyer’s trust, given the risks that can be associated with what is new and relatively unknown. They thus need to be regarded and proposed cautiously. General reasons for technical success. Construction-wise, overall reasons for success seem to be associated with aspects such as: constructive simplicity; low-tech; availability of materials; or use of safe technologies, i.e. meaning there is a general knowledge of building technologies in use. On the other hand, overall reasons for lack of success can be related with aspects such as:

238

constructive complexity; misuse of new, unsafe, technologies; design with little concern for the building lifecycle (for instance, on maintenance costs); lack of communication between commercial and/or contractor and design author aspects; top-down, speculative design, with little or no consideration for flexibility/adaptability issues; and so forth.

10 LIGHTWEIGHT PREFAB ISSUES

Building faster and lighter, but possibly with higher risks attached. The growing prevalence in the use of modern, lightweight methods of construction, such as timber or steel frames, over older, heavier techniques as with bricklaying or concrete blocks, generally enables to build quicker, cheaper and more efficiently. However, some of the materials involved in these methods may carry substantially greater risk projections, which are used by insurance companies or banks, and thus can have a direct impact in financial factors such as insurance fees or mortgageability. Fire safety issues. Fire safety typically has a more demanding regulation in lightweight prefab, typically requiring a greater concern in the enclosure of vulnerable structural components with approved fire-resistant assemblies and/or involving expensive automatic fire sprinkler systems. In-situ quality control must be a strong concern, since with speed requirements work- manship can often negligently rush an adequate jointing of elements, contributing to increase the risk of structural integrity in case of fire. Among the risk factors, the major concern is driven from greater fire spread risk assumptions, due to the use of lightweight and/or com- bustible materials. Weather risks. Possible hidden gaps in prefab construction may become a gateway to wind and water. These can lead to small incidents, or if developing under the radar, to severe pathologies and disproportional high losses. Weather damage in the materials from wear and tear over time, or from storms and/or flooding, are also to be considered. The new/unknown risks. On top of the previously enumerated risks, it can be added an unknown resilience of many new and innovative materials, as well the contractors’ lack of experience with these and the assembly techniques required. Repair flow risks. Given the nature of the construction business, and the typical profile of construction companies, it can also be a concern the problems of obtaining replacement components in the future, especially if a particular manufacturer goes out of business. Acoustic insulation issues. Acoustic insulation makes it harder to build than in concrete slab methods. General concern should address impact and noise insulation from other houses and in

239

between floors, and integration with other building elements. Particular concern must be addressed in the floor surfaces, insulation between floor/ceiling, ceiling material and thickness, and in a resilient isolation of components such as the light fittings. Vibration issues. Although without the creak noises of old wood floors, lightweight constructions are likewise more prone to undesirable, perceptible vibrations of floors or walls. Mitigation measures may include use of heavier material overlay over structural elements and assuring a tight solidarity between different floor or wall components. Low thermal mass related issues. In lightweight construction, the typically low thermal mass of buildings can be an issue in terms of the overall energy efficiency of buildings393. Conversely, higher thermal mass can have a positive effect, particularly in climates where there is a higher diurnal temperature range394. In cold or cool climates, where heating systems are often used, high thermal mass construction is positive regardless of diurnal range. A very thick mass is not necessarily more effective in the direct gains, since larger elements have a negative dispersion effect395. Anyhow, any solution should have in mind the overall climate conditions, and be used in conjunction with appropriate passive or active solutions and design strategies. Options must consider energy requirements (varying on climate, design, and program), as well as the solar income (varying on climate, orientation and surroundings). On breathability of buildings. Breathability of buildings is key to understand building performance, but also how design should be conducted. The term can be misleading in building construction, since it is not only about air, but on the biological and chemical processes that occur between the inside and the outside of the building capsule. In particular, it is about the effects of water interaction with the building materials (condensation, evaporation, hygroscopicity, capillarity, absorption, permeability, and so on), thus affecting the building’s health and performance. The issue has become increasingly relevant with an air-tightness trend, with effects on a more intensive use of house climate control equipment. Compliance of construction elements. When assembled in-situ, OSB or other sub-final-coating board elements in lightweight construction can be hard to deploy seamlessly aligned, and the very expansion/contraction of materials can occur unevenly in different parts of the building, often making it hard to predict tolerances. This can have implications on the final coating, particularly if it is intended, for it to be smoothly continuous. As a possible mitigation strategy, final coating layers need to be adjustable to disguise eventual sub-layers’ imperfections.

240

11 ARCHITECTURAL PRODUCTION AND INDUSTRIAL PARADIGMS

Prefab and industrial paradigms. Prefabrication, in particular house prefabrication, often comes in comparison to the industrial state-of-the-art practices highlighted in the classical examples of car, ship or airplane construction. However, its constraints and entourage are of a different nature. In any case, there are aspects of these that make sense to integrate when thinking in prefabrication terms, e.g. a broad economical thinking, integrated production, supply chain management, quality control procedures, standardization and/or dimensional coordination, and a generalized and integrated use of digital tools for designing, producing and/or customer interface. Detailing vs performance approaches. Performance specification, as typical of OEM’s, is an alternative to detailed specification, with the architect designing according to the performance required, instead of thoroughly detailing the design. In theory, with a performance-based approach, the design can attain a greater freedom to market forces in the supply, thus contributing to keep controlled costs. Architect’s resistance to performance approaches. Due to the nature of the profession, set to imagine and design spatial/constructive solutions, architects are typically not very fond of performance-based approaches, preferring detailing approaches. Typically, architects consider the implementation of their firm’s detailing to be indispensable for the buildings image and/or construction quality. Anyhow, architects will unlikely use in exclusive a detailing approach for all specifications, particularly in less expensive housing, making also use of the market’s standardized and certified components, or of previously in-house developed and implemented details. Costs and value of a detailing approach. Detailed specifications can be a major cause for increased costs if set at a very early stage in the design, due to all kinds of changes that can arise during the entire process. Even if developing a detailing portfolio, with previously tested solutions, and combining it with new detailing specifications, the budget risks are still potentially higher. The value of detailing specifications can be highly esteemed among peers, but for customers that does do not necessarily provide great added value for money. Moreover, the detailing specifications and the concurrent production of drawings are responsible for a significant share of the architectural fees. Quality equation. Faced with both performance and detailing approaches, the architect’s dilemma can often be put on whether to provide good detailing at the risk of overrunning the budget or use standard detailing thus risking losing architectural quality. In a customer-driven building, to assure client’s wishes are suitably incorporated can highly increase the number of working drawings and overall specifications.

241

Errors, omissions and accountability. Directly or indirectly, the architect will be held accountable for errors or omissions in the written or drawn specifications for the construction, which often occur due to a high time pressure, that makes it hard to double check every element of the specifications. Even when the error is not the architect’s fault, he will have to either adapt the design to new circumstances (with added working hours), or to assume those faults, risking the envisioned quality aesthetic/constructive intents and in last resource his own professional image by a not so accomplished design. Faced with unexpected costs, contractors will attempt to turn these events to their favor. This makes the architect an easy target, and thus a weak bond in the construction industry ecosystem. With the use of non-standard and/or non-certified components, risks are potentially more expressive. Knowledge of the market. For different reasons, a broad knowledge of a fast-pace evolving market is not always possible, and thus some design solutions end up being somewhat a reinvention of the wheel. Anyhow, there are aspects of the design that just have to be detailed from scratch since there are no existing and/or adaptable solutions available in the market. Performance approach benefits and inefficiencies. Specifications and detailing are increasingly produced and made publicly available by the suppliers in physical or digital formats, through technical documentation, drawings, and so forth. If the systems or components are compatible (materials, connections, and so forth), they can easily be assembled to complete the construction using the separate specifications provided by the suppliers, which can hence be held individually responsible. The previous factors may contribute to ease pressure on relatively complex detailing and specifications, yet can create workflow issues, related with compatibility of digital formats, or a seamless integration of the diverse elements in any of the possible interchange scenarios (i.e. office-to-office, office-to-construction, construction-to-construction, or construction-to-office).

12 MODULARITY, CHANGE AND VARIABILITY

General modularity aspects. Buildings do not necessarily shout out loud I am modular, nor its design intents have to explicitly consider it. Nevertheless, the knowledge of different aspects of modularity can contribute to improve decision-making processes in the complex, multi-dimensional decisions that are required during architectural creation, namely having in mind aspects such as: interfaces; observing dependencies; or addressing similarities. Dependency reduction. Modularity is all about reducing dependencies, starting from a clearly established functional map. Indeed, dependencies can be observed more obviously in physical or

242

constructive terms, but in fact these are essentially emanated from to the ability or intention to discretize spatially attributed functionalities. Symmetry boosting. Symmetry related aspects must be a design concern if aiming to attain constructive cost-efficiency while keeping up with quality standards. The eventual idea that this may result in monotonous environments is wrong. Indeed, if devised accordingly, symmetry features can also enact a wide and varied range of solutions. Modular threshold offset (interfaces). Modules are not simply virtual squares or boxes, they are to be built in real space, and thus their boundaries have a structure, external and internal coating, and so forth. The latter has a body or a thickness, that we can call the modular threshold offset, that should be carefully addressed. Indeed, if in diagram the junction of modules can work seamlessly, when further detailed it will often arise contiguously duplicate elements. This can be less of an issue when these walls separate different dwellings, yet it adds unnecessary elements when within the same dwelling. When removing them in a drafting stage, particularly in the case of more complex connections between modules’, often unexpected blank areas come up, disrupting previous formal alignments, and so forth. Broadly, there are two main options in this respect, which are to either repeat structural elements or not doing it. The first, privi- leges discreteness, and thus has potential gains in terms of simplicity of production and assembly processes, although it might incur in material losses given the unnecessary repetition of construction elements. The second option, is released of these issues, but will likely have more dependencies attached. Faster, but not so fast. Potentially, one of the great advantages of prefabricated components over traditional make-to-order products is a faster in-situ assembly. However, components can have all sorts of different characteristics (sizes, shapes and/or complexity), the concurrent factors defining their greater or lesser potential batch size, but also implying different deployment difficulties. Logistic constrains. For reasons that are fundamentally related with logistic processes of transportability, maneuverability and consequent final in-situ deployment, in urban areas, particularly the denser ones, it generally makes more sense to use components where size, weight and form factors are least bothersome. Minimizing eventual constrains. To ensure a smooth, more sustainable, eventual future replacement of some components, or even their partial or total dismantling, care must be taken in assuring that interfaces are discretizable or excisable, whether dry or fluid connections are involved. Dimensional coordination. With mass-production strategies, the effectiveness in the implementation of construction systems is highly dependable on a proper dimensional coordination in order

243

for standardized components to fit, which benefits production scale but will likely make variability in components harder to attain, although there are exceptions (e.g. window frames, kitchen modules). Parallel production and digital tools. When variability of outputs is intended, the use of CAD-CAM in non-linear production methods can be a valuable contributor, with more recent techniques such as 3D printing with high potential in this domain. Prioritizing from a slow vs fast distinction. If variability is intended, constructively, it must be kept in mind that the relatively slower layers (e.g. slow concrete structure vs fast partition wall) will more likely have a deeper constraining impact, determining the performance of the other systems, and thus the ability to accommodate variations. Prioritizing from components’ connections. Generally, the simpler the connections’ characteristics between discrete components, the better in terms of the in-situ construction time and quality. For instance, typically the bigger components are more difficult to handle, thus particular concern should be put on these or others whose characteristics (size, complexity, fragility, and so forth) can be regarded as priority in comparison with the remaining building elements surrounding it. Keeping it open. An open building principle is supported on a philosophy that makes substitution possible between several suppliers. Why would a wall panel producer develop a complete wall system with no finishing required, if a similar result can be attained when supplied by different producers at a lower price? While gaining in labor replacement, removing finishing work from in-situ works can raise several issues. For instance, it raises connection issues (dimensional or material compatibility, and so forth), which depend on aspects such as agreements with other suppliers, compliance to certain norms or procedures, and so on. Construction speed issues. Whereas main structure can be ready relatively quickly, finishing layers can often take comparably much more time. The bottleneck seems to be more related with the compatibility of the different assembly procedures in the limited space available in-situ, than with the time they take per se, resulting in time waste between the diverse steps. It is hard to make the logistic control, since it is not easy to force sub-contractors or suppliers to follow an optimal logistic plan. Given the limitations, it is often hard to implement parallel methods, making more sense to spread them over time and space. As variability options increase, the problem only grows bigger. Getting around logistic bottlenecks. Only larger building companies, with considerable building volumes can have the strength to tie down sub-contractors, thus the only ones being able to aspire control over the logistic constraints underlying the compatibility of individual contractors in a

244 project. However, in most other cases, the best option is to remove as many in-situ activities as possible from the supply chain. Moving finishing and furnishing upstream. To remove the most labor out of in-situ, typically focus must primarily be held in finishing and furnishing activities, moving them as upstream the production chain as possible. To attain it, efforts must continuously proceed towards the con- vergence of the connections between different building systems (external connections), as well as of the compatibility between different elements of each building system (internal connections). Boosting ex-situ production and visualization methods. To increase the degree of ex-situ production, having a previous knowledge of both the buyers and of the options they want is key. However, people often change opinion. In a systematized, prefabricated construction method, changing options after the building process has started raises even more risks and difficulties than in other building methods. Therefore, to minimize the risks, visualization methods can be key for customers’ choice process.

13 IMPACTING DESIGN PERFORMANCE

Performance constrains due to services’ weight in construction. The increase of services’ weight due to comfort (e.g. thermal, acoustical), fire risk mitigation, overall sustainable requirements, and so forth, has become one of the major constraints in the spatial design, being pervasive to all construction methods. Performance limitations due to the (un)knowledgeability of systems. Architects are not necessarily attached to conventional or ordinary construction methods, but are also far from being able to deal with all building systems, lesser even if these are relatively new and/or unknown. Improving design performance by working from existing systems. Individual efforts by architects to adapt existing building systems (typically subjected to certification methods and the like) to their designs may prove to have little chance of success. Instead, it may be more feasible to constrain the designs from a prior knowledge of the systems. Performance and design subtleties. Prefabricated building methods may even have a better technical performance, but that does not necessarily mean they are more feasible to tackle architecture’s subtleties and complexities. Prefab methods have intrinsic potentials and limitations, which have to be understood and worked out accordingly, otherwise risking adding inefficiencies to the construction, with effects on output vectors. That is not a problem on its own, since working around limitations can work as a positive way for improvement. Nonetheless it is important to be aware of the risks.

245 Changing and/or developing a system. Changes on systems by individual architects may have a greater influence through publishing about architectural or technical performance in appropriate publications, than through single-handedly developing systems. The effort (time, financial) to proceed in the R&D and marketing stages is just too big to have likelihood of success if single-handedly doing it, unless perhaps if framed within a dedicated business structure. Integration towards improved performance. Producers’ impact will increase on the measure of the integration of both the constructive performance (certification schemes and the like) and the design performance (enabling differentiation, discretizing different building elements while enacting standardization of interfaces, and so forth).

14 FUTURE WORK

Test direct the design’s light/ventilation and circulation conjectures against real cases. Assess the assumptions of the design case against a broad batch of historical and/or contemporary built cases, namely in respect to direct light/ventilation derived grids and to circulation optimization. Extensive development of a global house prefab history. Develop in greater extent a global history of house prefabrication, further expanding some the sub-themes addressed (e.g. Japanese wood construction, patented designs). Design a new residential house prototype. Design a new prototype, but this time with the accumu- lated knowledge since the first.

246

IV Epistemological Notes [A Global Epilogue]

“It is no longer a question of either maps or territories. Something has disappeared: the sovereign difference, between one and the other, that constituted the charm of abstraction. Because it is difference that constitutes the poetry of the map and the charm of the territory, the magic of the concept and the charm of the real. This imaginary of representation, which simultaneously culminates in and is engulfed by the cartographer's mad project of the ideal coextensivity of map and territory, disappears in the simulation. It is all of metaphysics that is lost. No more mirror of being and appearances, of the real and its concept. No more imaginary coextensivity: it is genetic miniaturization that is the dimension of simulation. The real no longer needs to be rational, because it no longer measures itself against either an ideal or negative instance. It is no longer anything but operational. In fact, it is no longer really the real, because no imaginary envelops it anymore. It is a hyperreal, produced from a radiating synthesis of combinatory models in a hyperspace without atmosphere. Never again will the real have the chance to produce itself— such is the vital function of the model in a system of death. A hyperreal henceforth sheltered from the imaginary and from any distinction between the real and the imaginary, leaving room only for the orbital recurrence of models and for the simulated generation of differences” — Jean Baudrillard (1994) Simulacra and simulation : 2-3396

“They say men lived in trees one time. Somebody had to get dissatisfied with a high limb or your feet would not be touching flat ground now. (…) Someone’s got to do these things… Else Fate would not ever get nose-thumbed and mankind would still be cling- ing to the top branches of a tree”. — Samuel Hamilton character in John Steinbeck’s East of Eden

247

248

1 GLOBALIZATION’S SEMIOTIC PARADOX

In many senses, our world has become a globalized world397. Multiple events and conditions such as the dissemination of neoliberal though and economic orthodoxy worldwide, or how knowledge is produced and diffused, have been having major impacts upon processes of development, designing a global landscape, and deeply influencing our lives. Not surprisingly, the theme of globalization and its relationship with the built environment and with the territory in general, has fetched important concepts for architects, social scientists, geographers or economists, analyzing the shifts that have been occurring in the world’s economic, social, or environmental sceneries [complement with: An- nex, IV.1 The phenomenon of globalization]. In a structuralist sense, what can be called a global culture is as much a rhetorical construction as a local culture. Their critical construction is based on processes conveyed by signs, structured and organized in diverse ways, anchored in socio-cultural contexts, and to which language remains metaphor par excellence. Structures work dynamically, that is, it seems that neither their syntactic, nor semantic levels can be traced back to an ultimate Ontology. Instead, structures seem to have multiple traces depending on ever-shifting contexts and processes. In Umberto Eco’s words: “the code is presumably neither a natural prerequisite of the Global Semantic Universe, nor a structure that firmly and unalterably underlies the complex of bonds and ramifications that accounts for the functioning of every association of signs (…) i.e., that a semiotics of the code is an operative instrument that serves a semiotics of the message”398. Generically, on the architectonic code, a structure can be synthesized as a relational and referential organism determined by processes of successive simplifications regarding the devising of an effective (formal) purpose. From an architect point of view this means that a code remains valid for the actions emanating from the architectural code-in-use, regardless the code’s eventual evolution. But this is not necessarily valid for other codes, with the analogy also valid for codes used in different languages— e.g. the musician, the geologist, the economist, and so on. Such raises multiple questions, where are included, e.g., the role of technique, how can boundaries be set for a certain domain, the translation of thinking form to physical form, what differentiates the conceptual from the action, and so on. Lévi-Strauss expressed that the ontological universalism of an elemental code stands above the languages in which is expressed, from where, ultimately different languages can be regarded as translation aspects399. Ferdinand de Saussure’s structural linguistics indicates that language is a form, not a substance. However, if considering, as Eco did, that there is no Ontology, then substance and form are primitively equivalent. Thus, if substance is what emanates from difference (of form), then attempting to get to a primitive instance, where difference has not occurred, in the least seems to be logically incongruent. The mere observation of such original fragment would imply a difference roughly equivalent to the least required space-time conditions for form to be. In a way, in logical terms, this means form is all there is. But then logic is also a language. There is a circularity in all this. The mere existence

249 in the space-time of forms does not require an architectonic (i.e. an organizational apparatus). Yet the architectonic is there, implied, when acknowledging form. Therefore, the architectonic is of a global tendency by definition, i.e. gathering otherwise fragmented entities in a language, going beyond the fragments to critically handle them, blending difference in a fragment-plus. The existing and conventional structures of the architectonic code in architectural design and production are largely fixed by means of technical, orthodox, and traditional rules and laws400. Bra- zilia’s ambitious planners and architects considered the principles of functionalism and cultural symbolism, which has nonetheless resulted in a reality where the lives of inhabitants and users, their changing behaviors and lifestyles, were greatly bypassed, so that what was left was a monument to (hollow) architectural rhetoric. Indeed, to make global is necessarily also to make on a univocal, and therefore insufficient, or partial perspective, and the same is valid for its local complement. Adolf Loos once conceived architecture from triadic understanding of the architectural production: craft (action), draft (representation), and critique (rhetoric)401. In a modern industrialized world, from rhetoric, representation and action on a physical reality, the put in practice of a certain architectonic into a built environment is inextricably commanded by financial mechanisms, energizing the different unfolding plots from where forms arise. To a capital order adds that any one-sided attempt, such as e.g. a uniquely architectural approach, disregarding political, economic or technical realities, is insufficient to address the problems of the built environment. In this respect, Tafuri’s lesson is unequivocal: “It is useless to propose purely architectural alternatives. The search for an alternative within the structures that condition the very character of architectural design is indeed an obvious contradiction of terms”402. Structural linguistics tells us that to make a language anew, it is in the least required a binary sender-receiver, i.e. requires the previous knowledge of a different, departing language—and it will primarily be the departing language which will be enriched. Analogously, the knowledge of local circumstances is key to the success of implementing global methodologies—e.g. architecture cannot take the place of the vernacular (the local’s utterance) and vice versa, as this would mean a global language to destructively conflict with a local language. Local and global are mutual processes and, thereby, any genius loci or the like, is not but an idealization of a genius loci403, their interdependence occurring analogously to the Vitruvian ethos of house and city. In such inescapability, the bonds of architecture and capital are a reminder of a freedom and fulfillment which architecture cannot but to aspire, trapped by the elements lost in translation in a global which is also local.

250 2 SPACE-TIME SHIFTS

Raised from a sort of cartographic need of control imposed by the efficiency required by capital, globalization became a ubiquitous issue in our everyday life, affecting aspects such as the products we consume, how we communicate, work and relate with others, affecting the modes in which we understand and experience space-time. The prodigious improvements in the field of communication, IT’s and transportation, have been establishing new kinds of relationships in human history, reshap- ing the condition of place under a global-local dialectic. As space-time perception is acutely altered by instantly available information404, ease of commodity availability and people mobility, so the experience of the territory, or the concepts of nationality, citizenship, or authorship, are profoundly altered405. An instantly accessible world on steroids results in an image of support to the most private spaces, subjected to the openness and intimacy of online, pocket-fit and all-around available networks and the like. Such need for speed, or speed as need, is also responsible for a homogenization, or trivialization of a variety of public spaces that were once referential in an imaginary of local identities. The tendency is confirmed in many contemporary neoliberal discourses, powerfully expressing a representation of the globe as an increasingly integrated, homogenized, seamless whole, which settles in the prevalence of time over space, where synchroni- zation overpowers location, clockwise efficiency crushes difference. As Paul Virilio wrote: “in the realm of territorial development, time prevails from now on to space”. It is no longer a chronological local time, but a “universal world time, opposed not only to the local space of a region’s organization of land, but to the world space of a planet in the process of homogenization”406. An adaptive (or evolutionary) development of construction practices had molded the physical elements of the human habitat until the Industrial Revolution. Since then, for the first time in history, and at a planetary scale, the fast pace of the modern architectural methods has in a way been homogenizing cities and architecture in a rapid and once unthinkable manner. In a sense, modern architecture and urbanism has not only given us flat roofs and sanitized streets, it has also contributed to a homogenization of our cities. As Frampton wrote: “the phenomenon of universalization, while being an ad- vancement of mankind, at the same time constitutes a sort of subtle destruction, not only of traditional cultures, which might not be an irreparable wrong, but also of what I shall call for the time being the creative nucleus of great cultures, that nucleus on the basis of which we interpret life, what I shall call in advance the ethical and mythical nucleus of mankind. The conflict springs up from there”407. What is currently left from a mythical, slowly evolving vernacular world, is no more than a detached insight. In the great majority of the remaining cases, the archaic vernacular has turned into a sort of touristic theme park, where the original motives are barely recognizable, conserved in a form which no longer finds a correspondence from within. That can be noticed in the famous examples of Ait Benhaddou in Morocco, Mykonos in Greece, Cappa- docia in Turkey, Piódão in Portugal, and many others. These are somewhat artificially preserved and

251

there is barely any trace left of the socio-cultural systems that originally gave it shape. As result, in a way, these forms have become mere caricatures of a nostalgic and romanticized past time, while their surrounding territorial remains are left to an unprivileged chance. In contrast, what we see in some extreme contemporary ordinary vernacular forms are miserable dumps where many would not even consider living in. These are no longer wrapped up of an old detached romanticism, and that is probably why they are often also called ordinary forms, instead of the (new) vernacular they too are. Famous [and astoundingly huge] examples sprang, from the Favelas in Rio de Janeiro or São Paulo, the Vietnamese Nhaa ven song river slums, the Neza-Chalco-Izta slum in Mexico City (the world’s largest mega-slum also known as Ciudad Perdida), or the slums in Manila, Lagos, Mumbai, Caracas, and many others around the world. Yet, perhaps in a part of our imaginary, we would like these to keep modelling the built landscape, since regardless their evident issues, they too are compact, bounded, complex, lively, intense, bursting with problems but filled with life. Ad- ditionally, as in the archaic vernacular, they keep a certain photogenic quality, which can be so treas- ured in an isolated touristic visit or the-like408. Henry Cartier-Bresson used to say something like what we photographers don’t capture immediately, is lost forever, and perhaps sometimes it is just easier to forget what happens outside the embellished frame. In a certain way, deeply we would like the vernacular’s (ordinary) best qualities to keep characterizing the villages and regions of a coming-to-be time. Cer- tainly, some of the empty historical urban centers, as found in some old-Europe towns, praise for the return of a lost density of life—the life that escaped, motorized, to the suburbs. It adds that, in many circumstances, we would prefer something else than the legal but speculative, [more or less] planned but diffuse recent territories, which can be found on the outskirts of many world cities, where rapidly the urban fabric is squandered in discontinuous, fragmented [and ugly] spaces which many would prefer to ignore. Le Corbusier’s tour, described in Le Voyage d’Orient409, went so far as the Balkans and somewhere near Istanbul. Nowadays his journalistic notes on that voyage would probably never have that title, since for today’s standards he barely left Europe, which makes what could be a kind of exoticism of orientalism account indeed sound rather common. Exoticism, if there is any left anywhere, has been belittled. In a world of revisited and easily available all sort of trivialized seven wonders, phenomena such as tourism in all its variants becomes a global experience. Every major city has, in its touristic guides, the art history or the contemporary art or natural history museum, the parks to visit, the opera, the busy bars and night-clubs area or even the two-story buses or panoramic boats; spaces above all dedicated to the needs of an erratic lifestyle that seeks everywhere the same facilities; spaces of temporary inhabiting that put a homogenizing veneer to localities. Nonetheless, as the unsuspected Lévi- Strauss points out, “differences are extremely fecund”410, and it is unlikely that any sort of process, no matter how powerful, will ever completely shred difference.

252

We can see globalization as generating increasing homogeneity, while giving death to the fabric of diversity through a sort of westernization of the world. But we can also see it as generating heterogeneity and diversity, e.g., through hybridization. These can be observed in phenomena such as fusion of food, of music, of iconography, and so on. Inescapably, since industrialization took its pace in most of the world’s territories, it is difficult, if not impossible, to speak about pure locally-driven difference. There are many signal inputs, observable at a socio-cultural level, of growingly hybridized societies shaped by a diverse subcultural fabric. For instance, great world cities are largely multicultural cities, with multiple ethnic groups composing them: from Indian or Polish living in London411, to Chinese or Puerto Rican in New York City412, Algerian or Portuguese in Paris413, and so on. In many of these, it is perceptible an attachment of the migrant communities to delocalized traditions reminiscent of their places of origin, as noticeable by their nostalgic cafés, restaurants, shops, or in the neighbor- hoods referenced to these communities—in NYC alone there is China Town, Little Italy, Little Brazil, Koreatown, Little Germany or Le Petit Senegal. The power of IT’s boosts these displacements into truly heterotopic414 manifestations, enabling that, in a fragmented panorama, phenomenon’s such as immigration can be lived both in the origin and the destination. The place of arrival used to be set to be the only place in the immigrant’s real life, but that is no longer necessarily the case. The vivid realities, which IT’s are poised to create, can apparently make forget what the real looks like, embedding it in a sort of heterotopic illusion of proximity. This, in turn, can be deceiving, as it cannot replace the subtleties of a physicality achievable by a full presence with the original. Likewise, the space-time shifts driven by IT’s also make it easier to dissociate the work place and the dwelling place with the place of emotions, imaginary or of belonging. This affects fundamental aspects of our lives, such as the way we work or use leisure time, the way we move or rest… the way we dwell the world. That is particularly observable in a tendency of expansion of types of family structures comparatively to the traditional family patterns, consequence of different aspirations, different role of women, acceptance of different kinds of sexuality, different lifestyles, secularization, and so forth. The fast-paced arousal of the now pervasive social media has made it clearer than ever before. Many of the changes in our perceptive notions of space-time can also be linked a certain loss of place identity. The non-places415, a notion originally proposed by Marc Augé, describes some of these lost, universalized places such as a sauna, a hotel, or a shopping-mall, all non-permanent to their inhabitants, and all different but all similar everywhere: simultaneously homogenizing and hybridiz- ing. For instance, tourism on high scales powered by low-cost flights, that make travelling easier and relativize length of travel into duration, is accommodated by a wide range of non-places, as are air- ports, railway stations, major chain hotels, or trade fairs416. Added to the physical, psychological or

253

memory dimensions of a place, the ease to communicate to virtually anywhere in the globe, makes linkages to place to last and develop in different ways. The meaning of a place thus becomes more the product of the mounting sequence of perceptual experiences of life, than a simple juxtaposition of an individual meaning and personal space417. The nature of many of the places of contemporary society is given from its capacity to accommodate within a given frame, within material needs and geographical ties, within a multiplicity of meanings and projections. It is a nature open to multiple interpretations while still localized; it is vague and amorphous, but too static and rooted in survival needs. The instant world is a major source of the rhetoric conveying that with little effort and a little attention we can do everything everywhere: work in the most unsuspected places, socializing at our desk or on our phone, while creating increasing dependency with machines, changing the psycho-social ways to relate with the Other. Instant connecting means new significance to domestic and to private space, but also to open a breach to let in an unpredictable and not fully non-referential stream of signs and requests.

254

3 A GLOBAL ARCHITECTURE FACTORY

The space-time shifts involved in globalization processes empower the conception of a planetary factory, visible in multiple levels of the production chain, from design and production to purchase. From the mining of raw materials, to the multi-component devices designed, manufactured and assembled in many different locations, even in products we may not suspect at first sight, the log is truly global. Things can be produced and sold almost anywhere, be available almost everywhere, to almost everyone. Its epiphenomena in architectural production can eloquently be observed in a material sphere of the construction practices, with IT’s as primary catalyzers of new ways of doing in design. Construction material availability is wider than ever, and material suppliers reach more places than ever. Moreover, the implementation of construction practices is ever-more transnational, with builders, designers, consultants, and so forth, circulating between borders [complement with: Annex, IV.2 Three cases of global collaborative work]. The subject uplifts an old epistemological debate in architecture, where place-form and product-form are key components418. There are the canonical arguments of place, of an architecture which relates with a certain local reality. But then, there is also the notion of architectural commodification, which springs from the culture of consumption, with readily available materials and technologies. Some seek the safeguarding and development of time-honored local architectural traditions, forms, decorative motifs and technologies, often defending historical continuity, cultural diversity, and preservation of identity. Others promote invention and diffusion of innovative forms, using technologies and materials in response to changing functional needs and sensibilities, often focusing on systemization, flexibility, adaptability or interchangeability. Apropos, Montaner observed that “one of the basic features of the twentieth century was the triumph of abstraction over the mimesis, a triumph based on the prestige that reason and science had at the beginning of the century. Since then, a part of art and architecture took the machine and advances in scientific technology as a reference, and began to rely more on reason and systematization than in the irrational forces of imagination and creativity. It is an attitude of technological optimism that has reached our days and we can analyze it using two visions: the consolidation of abstraction as a renewing method to generate forms and rationalism as the basic discipline used by a part of architecture, art and thought”419. Regarding an industrial sphere, on the one hand, architectural design can be a positive driver for change and product development. On the other hand, in many ways, state-of-the-art industrial methods seem far ahead from the construction methods used in architectural production. The different ways architects may approach the context, materials or technology at their disposal is subject to different interpretations. Theories asserting that architecture depends on where the building is to be located, the intended program to which it must respond, the material conditions in which it must be conducted, or the way the user may or not be enacted to participate in the design decisions, have been profusely disserted420. Rational methodologies, reflecting these and other concerns, are certainly

255

a legacy that is to be kept alive and contextually fed. Nevertheless, the architectural artifact has also been conspicuously bonded with a subjective notion of authorship/artistry, which is in many cases adverse to certain rationalizing ways, as can also be to a stricter sense of place. On the other hand, the architectural perspective can too be disruptive, thus propelling breakthroughs and evolution, or even have long-lasting cultural or social impacts, acting as civilizational symbol. Aside quality, the vectors of economy and efficiency have always been an architectural task, in the sense that architecture is ought to deliver the best of the available resources, whether they are provided plentifully or not. Anyhow, there is always an adjustment between the expectations of the different actors involved (architects, clients, builders, and so forth) and the eventually available resources. Additionally, the technical apparatus, necessary for a building to be, is ever increasing, requiring a growing wider knowledge of subjects such as heating, ventilation, or other applied mechanics, as well of the materials, their characteristics, certifications, regulations, and so on. Therefore, building structures and technologies are becoming more and more dependent on the appropriate intersection of ever-more varied and specialized skills and expertise, and the building’s artistic imprint (or authorship) becomes more of a socially acknowledged trademark, rather than a fact. Anyhow, the reality of a building as the result of a collaborative work is not at all recent, as the XIXth century Pre- Raphaelites made sure to make a point. Nonetheless, if already more of a reality in the ancient builders of the great architectural landmarks, the issue has become pervasive to the most ordinary kinds of contemporary constructions. The developments in building construction that rouse from an industrialized world have contributed to keep a juvenile excitement about the material and technological possibilities and a resolute belief in progress, changing architecture’s entourage. A serious reevaluation of the design disciplines took its course in the burst of the XXth century, with a plea to bring a new insight to the architectural artifact. Architects, urban planners or theorists nurtured the ideal of a rational understanding of the built environment, developing methodologies to attain a maximum yield of resources, and so forth, epitomized in buzzwords such as function and economy, and stressed by the housing demand. Stand- ardization ideas brought about by the rational functionalism were a major research front, as was the mechanized production of the architectural object. If that brought about new possibilities, by doing so, architecture was also moved away from an artistic character, towards an uncharted territory of mechanical reproduction421. Since the early stages of mass production, architects had to begin considering the tendencies towards individualistic and fashionable consumption, the need to market inventions and the devalua- tion of objects. For the craftsman, the pleasure in work used to lie in the relation to the object being produced. For the user, the pleasure of the production of the object arguably lays in the consciousness of its human origin, in its ontological singularity. In the work of art, it is not the form that is cherished,

256 but the truthfulness of its originality or, as long put in evidence by photography, the authenticity of its underlying story. With an era of mechanical reproduction, it emerged a different satisfaction in a society of consumption, as it was notably stressed with the pop-art, that is, a hedonism laying not merely in the sense of a truthful story, but as a commodity fetish. On the other hand, if in some circumstances an original is the most valued, a sudden cognizance of a fake, in a once supposed original, drastically depreciates its capital value. Similarly, the collector cherishes the rare, authenticated object. But the artist and the collector act on different interests. The artist produces a synthesis which adds something more to a cultural heritage, enriching it, while the collector has foremost a conservative concern. Housing has long been in the center of the reproducibility debate. Regardless its type, serialized house production always departs from a speculative standpoint, an attempt to satisfy the requirements of a market sector, or of an emergency. A customer of a house may have special requirements, but these will be accommodated by adjustments to pre-established designs, whose architect may no longer be involved. In architectural terms, the issue can be put on how can the practice adapt to the requests of a factory-based and market-oriented construction industry. The answer may be to simply follow a speculative path, designing first and consulting the final client later. However, this is an anathema to most architects, who become active only when the client requires a solution to a problem. Moreover, there is the reluctance to abandon a certain notion that a building should be designed for a specific location—i.e. a unique building for a unique site, the building as an expression of the uniqueness of the place, or simply the designer’s aspiration to design and/or to be acknowledged. Nonetheless, a speculative and reproducible path has historically been followed for a long time, of which the persistence of the notion of type is an obvious example. Indeed, the history of architecture is largely the story of adaptation and recombination of existing types and/or styles. A certain rhetoric of resistance to design buildings speculatively and without reference to a specific site is even more surprising as it has been a perfectly normal practice, at least to the dawn of the modern movement. As current online social networks display, the more an object is reproduced, the more it can increase its value, which, in a way, contradicts the idea of the old law of supply and demand, as the object becomes more valuable and hence desired as it is increasingly more visible: it is instead the logic of publicity working. In a way, in our post-industrial society, things no longer need to be produced, they just need to be reproduced, with the idea enhanced in the immateriality or apparent innocuity of the digital artifacts. In fact, since products are subjected to the commandments of trends and the like, the value is established much in function of the visibility laid by the innumerous forms of publicity, with marketing becoming a ruler of social behavior—semiotics all around. With the increase in sophistication in the production processes, upgrading the once only repetitive mass-production, questions regarding the actual difference between fashion and style, the patent or

257

copyright problematics, educating consumers, the role of brand names, trademarks or display surfaces inevitably arose in architecture. It was as if the magic of culture, that had been lost with the loss of reciprocity between people and their handcrafted and inherited artifacts and the resultant loss of enchantment in the environment, was regained with the promise of an immediate, live, contact, where we all are apparently connected and possibilities seem limitless, although in fact they are not. In this sense, the modes by which architecture is produced and what architecture produces has been desta- bilized. In a way, if ever, architecture no longer seems to afford a patient transaction between cultures and possibilities, between investment and return, between the building and its experience—between seeding and cropping. In some cases, it mutates to the virtual instead of real buildings, freshness instead of slow, digestible, time. These are not deviated architectural approaches, yet once again signal of an inevitable epistemological transformation, following the motion of the world, and anyhow affecting the ways architecture is made and delivered. The global design factory is punctuated by brands, the semiotic backbone of the social visibility of things, the main driver of the consumption requirements of our economic reality. But if that is evident for consumer products, from Coca-Cola’s to iPhone’s, it may not be so clear in architectural design. Business agendas, consumer expectations, or market opportunities drive a ubiquitous culture of commerce which is too manifested in the built space. Architecture is thus also an instrument of power and capital, with representations set to endorse the symbolism and image of states, governments or companies, used for product identification or corporate purposes, branding space-time. It is thus not difficult to imagine cities not as skylines but as brandscapes, and buildings not as objects but as advertisements and destinations, again and still complex and contradictory. Times Square buzzing screens is a remarkable example, with its powerful electronic ambience. But the phenomena can also be more ordinarily observed in the glossy façades of mega-capital buildings punctuating the built landscapes of cities around the world, housing corporations, banks, hotels or offices. Likewise, branding in architecture can mean the expression of identity amidst a complex social fabric, whether by a company or by a city: Prada’s attachment to starchitectural design or Apple’s designing iconic iStores, where the very architectural design is patented, ready to replication, but foremost to corporate-protect an envisioned total consumer experience; New York, London, Dubai, Lisbon using architecture to propel their images, in order to generate economic growth, and elevate their visibility worldwide. As experiences become increasingly commoditized, and the global landscape seemingly more homogenized, it is also the role of architects to input meaningful transformations in a growingly aseptic language, of complex and mesmerizing but somewhat void shapes, where even difference is often addressed equally422. There are international brands, from junk-food to fashion, implemented a bit everywhere, with typified products, typified spaces, such as hotel rooms looking the same whether located in Nairobi or the Soho, and so on: non-places all around. There are too the local brands, which

258

will inevitably copy successful design formulas that come and go with the trends, and the affordability of massified design products—from an IKEA chair and desk, to a state-of-the art Apple desktop computer [complement with: Annex, IV.3 The Bo-Klok, or architecture as branded product]. There are also all sorts of practices of consumption and incitement to consumption, from museums or concerts to organized tourist tours, which share common economic, cultural and social processes worldwide. In many cases, and sometimes contradictory with some of these very practices, these been made at the expense of regional or local identities. For instance, catalyzing the destruction of older or consolidated urban fabrics, reducing investment (and potential for investment) in those, by instead opting to direct investment towards speculative schemes sprawling on the cities fringes and beyond, or its inverse, creating speculative bubbles which force people to move away. In some cases, this was at the expense of a suitable concern on the needs of the inhabitants, with reflex in the urban landscape, for instance by only making affordable housing schemes of doubtful quality and/or meager floor areas in exhaustively repeated typologies. In many cases, these were the result of a sort of deficient or limited long-term views by decision-makers, caused by economies following their own profit-driven ways, to which may be added, for instance, some lack of critical judgment or political short perspective. The shifts inducted by a global design factory can also be signaled at the level of design conception. The so-labelled architectural postmodernism offered numerous of such examples. For instance, Michael Graves has designed all sorts contemporary interpretations of classical shapes, doing it systematically regardless buildings’ sizes, contexts, functional programs or locations: “mimetic devices for a culture unfamiliar with the initial sources, belated signs of a public domain they never had, and never will have. Rome imported via New Jersey to Japan, the literal collapse of time and place”423, as Rem Koolhaas described. In a certain sense, these are in the least conceptually familiar with what occurs in places such as the Paris Las Vegas Casino in Las Vegas (1999), extravagances in the middle of the Dubai desert, such as the Burj Khalifa skyscraper (2004-10), the real-estate Palm Islands (2002-08), or the indoor ski track of Dubai Snow Park (2005), or other flaunting displays as a swimming pool connecting the rooftops of Singapore’s three-tower Marina Bay Sands (2010). All in all, heterotopic architectural dimensions of more or less anachronic glimpses, capitalist symbols, global as can be. The long-praised notion of place, or even of architectural artistry or authorship seems irrelevant in these places. What is depicted in these postmodern landmarks is true capitalist ideology in the extremity of the artifact-artifice: an architecture as symbol of man’s delusional power over space, over time, and finally over nature.

259

260 4 ARCHITECTURE, MEDIA AND THE MASSES

Architecture has been acquiring a global character which is inextricably linked with a conspicuous media sphere in which it is more and more involved with. The idea of a media affair is deeply historically rooted. We can notice it, for instance, by the spirit of the so-called architectural styles, as are the cases of the Romanesque or the Islamic architecture, both conveying a globalizing spirit424 and embodying a dissemination device. These are examples of an ancient, but still common mode of diffusing architecture, which can be related with information processes, but also to a critical sphere of the profession. Fed by the crafts, but also fed by the critique, architecture has always sought ways to communicate itself, even to the point of becoming mostly a representational métier, more of a draftsman thing than of a craftsman. As Loos wrote: “Books meant little to the craftsmen. The architect took everything from books. (…) And there was no end to the abomination. Everyone was desperate to see their things perpetuated in new publications and a large number of architectural periodicals appeared to satisfy the vanity of architects. And so it has remained to the present day. There is another reason why the architect has ousted the craftsman. He has learned draftsmanship, and since that is all he has learnt, he is good at it. The craftsman is not. (…) The architect has reduced the noble art of building to a graphic art. The one who receives the most commissions is not the one who can build best but the one whose work looks best on paper. There is a world of difference between the two. (…) The graphic arts and architecture are polar opposites, at either end of the row. The best draftsman can be a poor architect, the best architect a poor draftsman. Nowadays those entering architecture are expected to show a talent for graphic art. (…) But for the old master builders the drawing was merely a means of communicating with the craftsmen who carried out the work”425. From mouth to mouth of master apprentice, to a contemporary communication to a wider audience, the choice of certain labels or critical statements aids to spread the architectural knowledge426. For instance, the word style is often used in architecture to reference a certain period, or certain characteristics, to convey a certain type of approach, a mood, an aesthetic, a recognizable type of form, or of construction, or of conceiving, or of building. It thus conveys a bond to craft, although it extends way beyond. This or other labelling is embedded of a universalizing character, which serves for its more or less arguable characteristics, but fundamentally for the purpose of communicating it, to make it understandable. Thus, it is ultimately a critic’s, historian’s or theorist’s construction, and inevitability, we must enter a taxonomic domain to observe, analyze, describe, or finally re-conform space-time in architectural terms427. For instance, modernist architecture, portrayed as a movement to produce a universal language has been critically called the International Style428, or in the bonds of architecture with capital, a notion of personality cult has contributed establish a starchitectural label over a self-referential, global constellation of architects429. Loos stated that on the opposite end of craft is draft. Perhaps he was not accurate, and on the opposite end of craft is critique, as craft is enriched by draft, enriched by critique, and recursively so

261

forth; or perhaps there are no opposites in this story. As signaled by a Tate Britain exhibition in Sep- tember 2012, the late XIXth century Pre-Raphaelites left an important legacy regarding the preservation of the values of craft while criticizing an establishment of a mechanist perspective and somewhat appraising sense of a non-authorial centered, communal work. On our times, the drift away from craft is more and more accentuated, but no longer because of a mechanist apprehension, as machines are already embedded in our realities, but because of a growing visibility of critique propelled by a conspicuous media. Vitruvius’ Ten Books of Architecture was, for the romans, a sort of universalization of good practices, as the books conveyed a certain generalization of ways of building. The principles have endured the centuries, being occasionally revived—as was the case of Leone Battista Alberti’s (1404-1472) refor- mulation in De Re Aedificatoria (1486)—but architectural knowledge has benefited from different ways of transmission. The ancient master-disciple knowledge transmission evolved, information availability increased, and more perceptive modes of accessing were developed430. In architecture, as in all areas of knowledge, that would be boosted by signal developments in printing or information systems—from Guttenberg’s printing system, the Morse code or the telegraph, to current digital systems. All in all, these contributed to the development of a broader intuition on the underlying processes of architectural production. Vitruvius’ books had no figures, but modern books soon were illustrated, providing architectural diffusion a richer visual sense431. The new endorsement was arguably inaugurated in 1537, by Sebas- tiano Serlio’s publication of the Tutte l’opere d’architettura, et prospetiva treatise, the first book of a series of eight—the last two were actually only published in the XXth century after his manuscripts. It is the first of its kind to be though for a wider audience as it is written in Italian—some were even published using alongside text in French—and made use of high quality illustrations, unlike Alberti’s De Re Aedificatoria, written in Latin and with no illustrations. Serlio’s ambitious publications were the first to present architectural theory in the form of a professional manual. It contained illustrations of similar series variations on a theme, such as the palace or the private house, none of which is derived from Classical buildings. In 1570, I Quattro libri dell’architectura, by Andrea Palladio (1508-1580), was first published in Ven- ice, and remains one of the most influential treatises in the history of architecture. It provided systematic rules and plans for buildings drew from Roman buildings and authors (namely Vitruvius), as from Italian Renaissance architects. It included plans and elevations of twenty villas, not all executed or with that intention in mind. The plans were also ideal types in which the principles of Renaissance composition and theories of harmony were presented. The conventions of composition and construction governing correct building practice are there established by prescription and example, as Palladio combined historical precedent with his own work, significantly innovating the genre of the

262 architectural treatise. It is notable for its vivid language, striking images, the ease with which historical examples sits alongside the designs they inspired, and by its accessibility. It was widely disseminated outside Italy as it was translated into several languages. The published translations increased the popularity of Palladio’s designs internationally, and helped their imitation and interpretation regionally. They left their mark on pattern books and trade publications, and so Palladio’s ideas became accessible beyond the upper-class owners and book collectors432. Alberti’s, Serlio’s or Palladio’s treatises are some the most influent of its kind made in the Renais- sance, yet are only some between the astonishing body of work that was produced in that period433, reflecting an interest in recovering history and transform it into a new path for knowledge through the sciences and the arts434. These treatises would inspire countless imitations that would eventually develop into forms such as architectural manuals and pattern books. For instance, through English translations of his publication, the influence of Andrea Palladio would eventually reach colonial America, becoming highly influential. Also significantly, a flood of more than 100 luxuriously illustrated pattern books were published in England during the XVIIth century to be broadly distributed in America435, although that many variations were not only due to Palladio’s. In any case, a high architecture could thereon reach almost everywhere, although many would degenerate to interpretative, down-graded developments of the originals. As Davies writes, “by the mid-nineteenth century in England the pattern book was being eclipsed by the rise of the architectural magazine. In the USA, however, it was spreading and beginning to mutate in interesting ways”436. A remarkable mutation would be that of the house catalogs, which started being published in the late XIXth century onwards in countries such as the USA or Sweden. Although not particularly known for notable design qualities, the development of pattern books or house catalogues nonetheless contributed to spread architecture to the masses. In the least, these typically assured quality construction, and inspired buildings made to the thousands. The developments also point out for what it can be interpreted as an inevitable association between architecture and publicity, and of bringing to the table an architecture that may not necessarily depend directly on a client, or of a direct relation with a client, or of a place, of a context. That is, to an architecture in the process of finding new and different ways of acquaintance, which envisions a more generic, global character. A vision of an architecture of validated constructive systems which are poised to different sorts of combinations to produce different designs, while deeply entangled with a business language, as with intrinsic bonds with prefabrication methods. Architectural treatises, paired with manuals, have always been linked to the day-to-day high architectural practices. The late XIXth century catalogs offered a dream to the masses, with their considerable variety of plans, regardless being a depiction of certain idealized tastes, or styles. The prominent Frank Lloyd Wright himself would issue pamphlets, advertising a popular, stylized architecture with

263 controlled costs. For the most part, architects were unnecessary for these catalogs, once they were offered as a complete package. In the early XXth century the Aladin or Sears Roebuck and Co catalogs were well-known in the USA, among dozens of other books that had homes ready to build. It is famous Buster Keaton’s (1920) surreal comic satire to this type of houses in the short film One Week, in which the character attempts to mount, following an instruction book and without great success, a wood catalog house received by mail from a fictitious company name Portable House Company. The example denotes the socio-cultural relevance of these catalog houses and is an eloquent metaphor for the difficulties inherent of the prefabrication of housing construction. The businesses of houses received by mail would not survive the Wall Street crash of 1929 but the catalog method persists today, accounting for much of the American suburban landscape. Current software-packaged house catalogues are much more sophisticated. These may include pre-designed house in certain styles, as well options for the intended number of bedrooms or the price range, and so forth. It is also possible to set houses in a tridimensional environment using diagrams which are later translated to real plan by the software in use, opting for the variety of forms of roof, windows, doors, materials and others. After opting, software may translate the design to plans and other visu- alizations, making instant bills of materials. As in the catalog method, options are obviously limited. In a different perspective, some of the developments of architectural publications also evolved to an idea of brand, embedding the notions of trend or fashion, thus more restricted to a specific time and range. Contemporarily, we can associate the phenomena with certain fashion magazines, coffee- table books, or the like, showing the ultimate trends of living, and mixing it with design furniture and objects, presented in carefully selected photographs. The social media, blogs or other web phenomena have given it a different twist. The examples are plentiful, from more generical design media— e.g. Wallpaper, Dezeen, The Cool Hunter, Evolo, Icon, Mondo—to more arguably more specific architectural media—e.g. ArchDaily, Architizer, Architonic. Bounding it with a certain trend, via a mix with design or art objects and the like, makes it more appealing to a wider audience, but such is also a double-edge sword. As people are supposedly more informed, the speed of trends may often set little or no room to a suitable scrutiny of information, to which adds effects such as the repetition or circularity of content between the different media and publications. There is more information available, but also more noise disrupting the message. As argued by Colomina, in an early reflection on the theme, architecture only becomes modern in its engagement with the mass media, and in so doing so, it radically displaces the traditional sense of space and subjectivity437. Where conventional criticism may portray architecture as a high artistic practice in opposition to a mass culture, an informational paradigm has come to define our culture as the true place within which architecture is produced. The architectural discourse has thus become an intersection of a number of systems of representation such as drawings, models, photographs,

264 books, films, and advertisements. Such does not mean abandoning the archetypal architectural object—i.e. the building—but rather looking at it differently. In that sense, the building can be understood in the same way as all the media framing it, as a mechanism of representation in its own right. It is again Loos’ triad of craft, draft and critique, with an increased emphasis on the latter, certainly a reflex of a post-industrial detachment from craft. With modernity, the site of architectural production moved from the street into photographs, films, publications, and exhibitions—a displacement that presupposes a new sense of space; a space defined by (moving) images rather than by walls. Today’s architecture renegotiates the traditional relationship between a communal and a domestic sphere in a way that profoundly alters the experience of space. The (built) landscape is affected by fashion, war, sexuality, art, show, religion, TV, or social media. Finally, it is distilled on the interiority that constructs the (post)modern subject: its dwelling438. We have been witnessing an increasing projection of architecture in processes and displays of media representation, through brands, advertisements and the like. That can be traced back to the advent of a modern approach, as noticeable through Loos’ or Le Corbusier’s writings. Archi- tecture and media representations are now entangled more than ever before, and that is in a good part due to the ubiquitous nature of the media we currently have at our disposal worldwide twenty- four seven.

265

266

5 SHIFTS IN THE PROFESSION

The media entanglement is linked with an important aspect surrounding the architectural profession, which is social notoriety. Visibility begets attention, attention begets discussion, discussion begets notoriety, and finally, perhaps work to feed the architectural office. Work begets visibility and so on, in what appears to be a natural cycle. The tradition of architects’ visibility is straightforward: trained as professionals, architects acquire work through both their contacts and the skills they demonstrate in making buildings. Built work gradually ensures wider circles of attention for the practices, and correspondingly more work, increasing in volume and in complexity as a reflection of the growing contacts and expertise. This tradition certainly may broadly true for most architects exerting the profession in a conventional way. There are others, perhaps more intellectually inclined, whose ambitions may lay in having more direct impact on the environment, following more of a political path. In this case, the connections must be pursued more aggressively, the level of achievement is set higher, the cultural pretensions of the work are similarly high. In the past, quite often such architects became the heads of academies (Walter Gropius or Hannes Meyer) in order to be part of the political system, to be closer to the nexus of decisive political power. Another route to visibility for the ambitious architect was the radical group, the exhibition, the competition scheme, the private publication, the manifesto (Le Corbusier or Mies van der Rohe)—the building as a means was not always available to such architects, whose connections to, or influence over private individuals or corporations willing to spend money on building, were very often limited. The majority of the acknowledged Modern masters (in Europe, anyhow) and members of the avant-garde had these qualifications in common, forming a tradition of their own and providing a tem- plate for future generations of architects. It is worth stressing that these were referred to by both the public and peers alike as masters. It is also worth noting that this tradition is still very much in place today, i.e. there are architects sustained by their directorships of academies, and architects who survive on the basis of hypothetical projections. In the worse cases, the visibility value in each may stand in old-fashioned perceptions of the authority of academic work and the artistic honesty of independent creative research. One of the outcomes of globalization in respect to architectural practice has been the emergence of firms with a global portfolio. There are transnational corporations in their own right built up commercially, rarely winning awards and building up a lot; or the ones that have grown from practices that are design-oriented but business-centered. There are also design-oriented practices but whose senior partners have grown a great deal of visibility, a celebrity status even439. This starchitecture walks along commodification, of a global commercial culture that is enabled by changing consumer expectations, market opportunities or business plans. Traditional identity groups based on class, ethnicity,

267 age or genre started blurring as people were growingly free to build their identities and lifestyles through their modes of consumption. Product design and niche marketing, as with branding, have become nuclear to the enchantment and re-enchantment of things. Guy Debord’s society of the spectacle gave birth to a society of consumption440. The architectural manifestations of these developments include iconic sky-scraping banking tow- ers and TV networks, chains of brand transnational hotels, franchise restaurants and shopping malls full global brand stores. Even city centers are commodified or transformed into a sort of museum by urban makeups and/or punctual state-of-the-art interventions by renowned architects. National and regional governments hire famous architecture personalities to refresh their city skylines and create memorable places. Examples of such buildings are the Guggenheim Museum (Frank Gehry, Bilbao), the CCTV Headquarters (OMA, Beijing) or the Swiss Re (Norman Foster, London). Their authors are part of the legion of starchitects. All of it could not exist without the media441. From the 1990’s, the media buzz phenomena showed its great influence in the world of elite architectures, where media powered images started to predominate over real buildings. All of it is the expression of what was before announced by Marshall McLuhan in the 1960’s: the predominance of visual media over the language and the contents. The era of digital image-media-production has cursed much of the architectural production to immediacy and often to a kind of futile search for instant memorability. Carefully selected photographs in slick magazines and professional journals become the ultimate glorification to their authors: a signal of self-cult and of commodification of architecture in a growingly global consumerist society; a quest for a sort of impressiveness that leads to the disappearance of perception and memory; a set where buildings, claiming for attention, struggle to be distinct from one another, where the cacophony of the whole results in a seemingness of the parts, all-new, all-different, looking kind of all-the-same. Sometimes the amazing photographs in slick magazines are just preview renderings or illustrations, authentic virtual-architecture. These are often at service of marketing strategies for all sorts of purposes, from seducing and convincing the architectural client with the aid of imagery, to large-scale publicity of speculative real-estate. The global financial crisis and the major cuts associated in the construction industry that have occurred in the end of the first decade of the XXIth century forced many architects to deeply rethink their profession. It gave a stronger, conjunctural visibility to a state of epistemological transformation which has deep structural roots. Regardless the circumstances, in some cases, architects turn to a sort of boundary skills, for instance by selling their work also as virtual images creators, advertisers, graphic designers, and so on. In other cases, in larger structures, architects rethink their overall philosophy of architectural production. In such cases, the profession can be fostered into a sort of architectural consultancy scheme for areas such as fashion or advertising, as it is the case of OMA/AMO company442. In many circumstances, to be a business from which people can make a

268

living from, architecture seems not to afford to be just architecture in its age-old high sense, or in the least be ready to ever change. Such is a deep conflict, which has been existing for long and probably will keep for long443. Tafuri has eloquently described the effect decades ago: “Paradoxically, the new tasks given to architecture are something besides or beyond architecture. In recognizing this situation (…) I am expressing no regret, but neither am I making an apocalyptic prophecy. No regret, because when the role of a discipline ceases to exist, to try to stop the course of things is only regressive utopia, and of the worst kind. No prophecy, because the process is actually taking place daily before our eyes. And for those wishing striking proof, it is enough to observe the percentage of architectural graduates really exercising the profession. Also, there is the fact that this decline within the profession proper has not yet resulted in a corresponding institutionally defined role for the technicians charged with building activity. For this reason one is left to navigate in empty space, in which anything can happen but nothing is decisive”444. The 2011 RIBA (Royal Institute of British Architects) call for the architects’ role in 2025 was both a signal of a growing professional concern on the object of the very profession, and of a state of crisis. The question it poses says it all: Will architects exist in 2025?445. The very word architecture is often and increasingly borrowed, e.g., to computer programing language in expressions such as programming architecture, system’s architecture or software architecture, giving emphasis on a blurred state of the word, and of the profession. All these can be seen as manifestations of crisis. By crisis, we do not necessarily mean a more or less conjunctural economic crisis of global effects, that may erode a construction sector and hence the architects’ ability to produce their work into the built environment. It is also a crisis laying in the very ethos of the job. If even the starchitects, as in the AMO proposal, feel the need to turn themselves to other tasks, in the least, we can assume that we are moving towards a state of things where the architect’s role is voided from a traditional or conventional sense.

269

270

6 CRISIS, CONFLICT AND EMPOWERMENT

No one could seriously expect architecture to solve societies’ ills, as some modernist founding fathers apparently believed. However, even if it embodied such potential, it would have to reckon that the world is ever transforming. Nonetheless, architecture can contribute to make a difference. In the least, it can make a difference between something that exists and an aspiration, an intention into the future, a resolute target, set regardless contingencies, creating symbols and images, giving a more tangible body for such purposes. In this sense, architecture can work as a powerful political and/or ideological servant, vehicle towards certain purposes. Some political decisions set the course of entire nations, or even affect people across the world, but architecture per se is unlikely to reach such an influence. Anyhow, the ability for architecture to make a difference may often be less in what has a more direct visibility, and more in what remains invisible or untold, in the impressions it sets available to provoke in people’s minds regardless any aprioristic intention. Between the theoretical advances in the sciences or humanities, and architecture’s developments, there is a vast unexplored territory. Broadly, that most probably has to do with a material and formal bond that architecture is required to fulfill, whereas in areas whose bond is predominantly set in a logical field, and/or a verbalized concretization, the development of ideas and concepts can expound without less of constrains of a practical order. In that perspective, architecture might not aim but to attain a lesser conceptual complexity, since its language starts from a more constrained milieu. That is, a milieu in which in the least some sort of perceptible form in space must be delivered, and that inevitably implies mental concessions for the sake of a sound executive deployment. On the other hand, architecture can deliver things that other areas cannot, and that do not necessarily have to belong to a logical or verbal field, but simply to things which are latent within a sensible sphere, that is, whose language is non-lingual, thus with greater potential of engagement with the senses. Typically, this can be found in other artistic expressions, even in those art forms that we may not suspect of beforehand. For instance, in Robert Wilson’s theatrical plays, an art which is canonically verbal, there is an assumed non-verbal dialogue between the different elements, between the actors, the set, the lights, the audience, and so forth, and finally in the space-time they all create446. Remark- able architectural specimens, aside their more or less describable features, can also transport us to placeless and timeless places, that is, create an effect that both exceeds and is deeply within us, speaking to us silently. Aside the experience that architecture can provide us, there is also an illusional side, that is, the projection into a future, making us mesmerize in what the future may be, providing concrete images of how it may look. But as every illusion, that can also turn out deceptive. Regardless the criticism arising from prominent thinkers such as Guy Débord, the social movements of the 1960s were pretty

271 much laid in the context of a techno-optimist worldview. Post-WWII economy was driven by consumption—the baby boom was a consumption boom, an unlimited belief in progress. Anticipating what would be the post-war trend, the 1939 Flushing Meadows, New York World Fair, was based on a vision of the future, with a view of forces, ideas and machines that prevail, plunging its visitors in a technological world of wonders, where they can be at the forefront, as empowered consumers447. The 1970s oil crisis would recall a deeper reality was at stake. From the unlimited belief in progress, uttermost expressed in architectural terms in the ad novo construction of Brazilia, to the Vietnam anti- war protests, it was just a small step. The Keynesian economic theories served as a model in the developed countries to overcome the Great Depression, WWII, and subsequent postwar economic expansion (1945-73). The theories would lose influence with the oil crisis of the 1970s448, but with the global financial crisis kicking in 2008, there was a resurgence of application of the Keynesian ideas by some countries. We do not have to go very far to find examples in which something that is planned as a bright future eventually reveals its faults. For instance, in Brazil, some of the stadiums built anew for the 2014 World Cup were set for sale in 2015449, in the very least signaling the failure of a sort of delusional belief in techno- optimism. Between conservation or consumerism, durability or obsolescence, the 2015 Volkswagen scandal was just one more nail in the coffin, probably just the tip of the iceberg, in the least signaling how doubtful so-advertised eco-friendly intents may truly be. In a famous paper, the Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning (1973), Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber wrote that there could be no universal truths in design, there is no objective best solution, “there are only good or bad solutions”450. In a way, that opens way to an understanding that formulating the (design) problem is the problem. In this sense, form is (un-conscious) restrain and, thus, design should embrace wickedness and complexity. What remains, one may consider is applied technical knowledge, derivative knowledge stemmed from an initial formulation. Nonetheless, the technicality of the derived remainder is as important as the problem formulation to bring form into life, and can be extraordinarily complex to put in practice. One day Edgar Degas, the painter, complained to Stephane Mallarmé, the poet, that it had cost him a whole day to try to write a sonnet: “And yet I’m not lacking in ideas, I’ve enough of those!”; Mallarmé could not resist answering: “But Degas you need words to make a sonnet, not ideas”. Anyhow, the technical expertise in many circumstances is simply not enough to address what can be urgent habitat issues, and in the harshest cases people have to manage a way to get a roof over their heads. In contrast to an inescapable media culture of architecture, architects probably ought to spend more time reflecting on the socio-spatial effects of their work. Certainly, architecture on its own is not able to solve society’s ills, but architects have an immense social responsibility, as their hands are

272

traversed by an enormous communal investment towards the built environment. Architects are vehicles to formalize it, and by so they ought to deliver living environments which enact people to exert their own control (their freedom), and sustain voluntary or spontaneous social interaction. In the least people, should be free to pick if the dwelling is to allow a certain self-fulfillment and/or if housing is to be made and traded as any other consumer good, and so on. The Pritzker prize attributed in 2016 to Alejandro Aravena in the least denotes these concerns in the debate. Nonetheless, to some architects, the contemporary cathedrals, such as the museums, have in many cases become the [formal] ideal of the house. By that, we mean that there is a kind of silent competition for public visibility to deliver the most extravagant, out-of-the-box concepts and forms. It is as if every piece of architecture was to acquire a grand artistic status or the notoriety of the remarkable and exceptional public buildings. Most likely, a built environment made exclusively of architectural exceptions would be as tedious as if uniquely made of monotonous repetition. The correspondence seems to be mutual, that is, a house too can be used as a prototype of an object of a larger scale, as has been exemplified with the model of a house blown-up to the scale of a music hall in Rem Kool- haas’ Casa da Música (2005) in Porto. Overall, these references also signal an architectural culture where the structures float in shifting significances. Such is artistically and aesthetically fruitful, as it may be socially or sustainably neglecting. Truly addressing social or environmental matters is often faded, or left to a secondary plane. It becomes indirect consequence, not primary concern. With it, a culture of congestion truly becomes a culture of form-casing-congestion451, where the only remaining ethics is aesthetics: individualistic society at its best. Architecture is not like art, as in classical sculpture or painting, it creates spaces that are ought to be lived and experienced. It is not a museum art piece, although the museum itself is in display. As Herman Hertzberger ironically notes, “the problem with buildings is that they are too vulnerable, too subject to deterioration, and too big to fit in a museum”452. In this sense, architecture should be open-ended, capable of interpretation. That includes acknowledging the existence of diverse tones and shades in an architecture vs user/society conflict. When we say conflict, it is not only a conflict between the architects and the rest, that is, a conflict between those that need to be educated to understand what architecture is about, and those that supposedly know what it is all about—as we know, the noble intents to give and architectural education to the public have already astoundingly failed in Modernism. Instead, it is an unfolding epistemological conflict occurring in and out architecture. It is important to remind that conflict is not necessarily a negative, antagonistic force. It can also be a creative force, enduring the ability to free think. A force involving direct communication, and that hence may be used as a generator to engage or maintain a participatory process, to escape an imposed alienation—participation as a means of exerting liberty, of individual control over how to live, how to deal with the body, to free think. A thus architecture of alterity seems to imply the

273

blurring of the architect’s role, and this can render a certain fear in the professionals on whether or not to include imponderabilities in the designs. Empowering the user is freeing, but also making it consciously responsible, accountable, and such does not mean voiding the architect’s role, yet making the architect more aware of alternative modes of addressing the architectural design. Moments of crisis, of conflict, are also moments of creative production. Fast-moving, unfolding conflict has an acritical, naïveté quality, which is mounted in crisis. On the other hand, long, pondered motion sets space for critique, and is of a very different type. Crisis intervenes in the avant-garde production of difference, the critique in recording, labelling, cataloging, and set comparably, acknowledging the change that occurs through difference. “Coherence is the virtue of imbeciles”, said Oscar Wilde; “todo cambia” sang Mercedes Sosa; “the constancy of change”, wrote Amos Rapoport. The space of contingencies is also the space of creative action, the freedom to act, of changing opinion, of changing circumstances (and change changes). Then, there is also a double-sided gap of knowledge, and communication, which is conflictual, laying between the expert (architect or other) and an eventual user empowerment. On the ambiguous status of the professionals and the outsider relation, there is difficulty in identifying with the architectural occupant, and the occurring lack of communication leads to a form of imposition, which results in conflict. On the other hand, in an ultra-liberal marketing-flooded contemporary global society, the claims for social engagement must be carefully scrutinized, as sometimes it becomes extremely hard to distinguish if these are really for real, or just another way of getting on by a system engaged in profit: the business as usual. Between the 1960s social movements and today, there is a major difference in the economic environment, to say the least. In a way, neoliberalism has become conspicuous, and idealism has given its place to his alter entrepreneurism, even if both can be considered as different names for an analogous purpose. The prolific development of utopian architectural proposals in that period is certainly related with a sort of intellectually naïve belief on non-limited prosperity and social well-being, provided in a time where economic growth seemed unlimited. James Howard Kunstler has delivered an expressive diagnose on the issue: “The immersive ugglyness of our everyday environments is entropy made visible… One can call it many names, ‘automobile slum’, ‘suburban sprawl’, ‘technosis externality ex-tra-fuck’, or simply the greatest misallocation of resources in the history of the world… The end of the ‘cheap’ oil era is about to change everything, and there is not going to be a hydrogen economy… Therefore something will have to be done. We will have to downscale, rescale, downsize virtually everything we do, and we cannot start soon enough to do it… The age of the 3000 miles Cesar salad is coming to an end, and new urbanism must take it into account… Life in the mid XXI century will be about living locally, and necessarily be ready to help the neighbor next door… We are not consumers; we are first and foremost citizens”453.

274 We believe that the problems among our built landscapes are not in taking a certain building philosophy instead of another, say density vs sprawl. The greatest problem seems to be when we lose interest, when we stop seeing things worth caring about. The modes to engage in care do not come from architecture, but from a body of culture of civic design (some may simply call it education), informing not only geographically but also culturally who we are, where we come from, what is our (hi)story. The remedy for mutilated urbanism is not in a XIXth century nature, with its luxuriously designed gardens, or a XXth century modernist green field, hiding (or de-localizing) problems inside clean-designed social housing blocks or the like, and that eventually later will be demolished when it becomes clear that the problems are still there. Remembering Rittel & Webber’s sentence, the remedy for wounded urbanism and buildings probably is good urbanism and good buildings, and not just caricatures of nature. There is not a single answer to it, perhaps a little bit more of ethics, or simply a little bit more of care, or a lot more of both. In 2008, the housing crisis in the USA reached its peak. The crisis started from a bubble of housing speculation and evolved into the greatest economic crisis in the USA in a long time. It would spread to many other countries forcing millions into unemployment, many for poverty, or even for home- lessness. Architecture does not have to be a privilege for the few who can afford it. Architecture should be able reach to all levels of society. As signaled in 2011 MoMA’s exhibition, Small Scale Big Change: New Architectures of Social Engagement, projects such as Diébédo Francis Kéré’s Primary School in Gando, Burkina Faso (1999-2001), Elemental’s Quinta Monroy Housing in Iquique, Chile (2003–05), Hashim Sarkis A.L.U.D.’s Housing for the Fishermen in Tyre, Lebanon (1998–2008), Estudio Teddy Cruz’s Casa Familiar in San Ysidro, California (ongoing since 2001), or Anna Heringer’s METI Hand- made School, in Rudrapur, Bangladesh (2004–06) are proof of a contemporary architectural concern in issues such as social engagement or sustainability. These projects are hard, or even virtually impossible to methodologically grasp, and often seem to fall on imagery delivery more than anything. Nevertheless, they also depict a pragmatic attitude and knowledge of the local conditions, and their authors seem to be committed and sharing a vision: improving human habitat through good design and practical solutions. In the cases where necessary, these too use contemporary tools, such as remote, internet-based platforms for design and knowledge exchange between the intervenient. These envision that from a small scale, from the individual, great change is possible in a community: active otherness, not alien strangeness. Teddy Cruz, in the preparation of the exhibition, affirmed something like: “ultimately, it does not matter whether contemporary architecture is wrapped by the latest morphogenetic skin, neoclassical prop, or LEED-certified photovoltaic panels if all approaches continue to camouflage the most pressing problems of urbanization today”. In any case, one must also not forget that social engagement or sustainability are also labels, and labels that are ought to be carefully scrutinized.

275

In a globalized world, where capital circulates instantly, new forms of establishing criticism and social engagement are also possible from local, but globally connected participation. Current technologies enable an empowering, organizational horizontalism, from where expertise can effectively share and exchange knowledge. Through connection, from a small, local scale, architecture may envision ubiquity rather than unity. The architect may even no longer be what we traditionally could assume it to be, but as long as society’s ills are lessened and the built environment’s is improved, at least some productive path has been proceeded. Robert Wilson once said, “when you finally know the answer to the artist’s question, the art disappears”. When you know the trick, magic is no longer.

276

7 CLOSURE

[1] In a globalized world there are profound space-time changes in in relation to our modern(ist) inheritance. Neverthe- less, the architecture that we make today still essentially traduces that inheritance.

[2] Architecture participates in a wider human construction process, typically traducing its approach in the space-time conformation and construction of the built environment, translated into the architectural artifact. For that to occur it converges an intention or wish and conceptualization dimensions and a praxis and production of that intention in a certain context or reality.

[3] Following a Cartesian logic, the essential building blocks of both these spheres can be categorized according to different perspectives, with different criteria and outcomes depending on the propositions—themselves subjectable to questioning or change. Even if partially or temporarily, one can ultimately aim at obtaining a methodological corpus that allows to ease the mechanization of certain processes, or at least to provide a heuristic that contributes to their concretion.

[4] As component of an executive sphere, by definition, prefabrication fundamentally implies a fabrication of a part or the entirety of an artifact at another time and place other than its final location. Its feasibility will be all the greater, the greater precision to be embodied in the development of all the mechanics of the process that leads to the artifact. However, upstream there are a number of factors that constrain the process, of which only a small part can be influenced by the architecture.

[5] Since architecture exists largely because of an intent of influence on the artifact, prefabrication would aprioristically be limitative of the full development of the architectural action. However, it is our belief that, in relation to other practices, the relationship can only win clarification, since the same difficulties are found in other levels of other executive spheres. On the other hand, implicitly or explicitly, it is evident a tendency of executive spheres in architectural production to make more and more use of prefabrication or prefabrication-related processes.

277 [6] Most of the architectural discourse and practice are based on an implicit or explicit recognition of contextual realities, therefore of a ‘local’ character. However, even if it is only from a semiotic or etymological point of view, architecture is ‘global(izing)’ by nature. In this sense, there are ‘local’ or ‘global’ semiotics, that is, representations translating interdependent processes traceable to human origins, and thus to the linguistic evolution (logical, communicational) that soci- oculturally conforms all others—technique, aesthetics, and so forth. Today’s architecture is global, in the sense that, despite local idiosyncrasies—such as climatic, geographic or geological specificities, with potential impact on construction techniques; or the most accentuated social or cultural specificities of some architectural programs—the references are global, the images are global, the materials and techniques are available in a global factory inextricably subjugated to global capital mechanisms of various orders and depths. In addition, as a global reality and mediatic discipline, there is a broader semiotics, where it is included sociocultural processes of information transmission, which have a downstream impact on both mental and executive spheres.

[7] The relationship of prefabrication with architecture is evident in the fabrication of constructive components with different shapes or dimensions and different degrees of complexity, and which would otherwise be more demanding or impracticable locally—the simple act of fabricating, a brick that is, already implies a space-time distance from the ‘local’. But prefabrication is also the epithet of the acceptance of a global architecture, which can be regarded according to a logic of product, thus participating in the conflict of ‘art’ with ‘reproducibility’, or of the original with the replica, and so forth. Moreover, prefabrication can be read under the prism of the dialectics of the ‘alterity’ of architecture itself, that is, in the conflict generated between the necessity or aspiration of a certain ‘control’ over space-time and the indom- itable course of that same space-time to the wills, changes, or whims of everything that happens after a certain point of order. Prefabrication can be seen as vector, technological weapon, business as usual model, or exogenous solution of problems that are fundamentally ‘local’. In that sense, it can be seen with skepticism. But prefabrication can also be seen as process, adaptable, integrable, dialogue vector, scale pointer of an economic response without qualitative concessions, allied with a sustainable approach to the built environment. In that sense, it can be seen with optimism. These two aspects have a conflicting side that finds an epistemological reflex in architecture itself, in conflict between the aspirations of the Art, the aspirations of Man, and the reality of Nature which essentially shapes them.

[8] Latent changes in the architectural profession must meet industrial and commercial practices. Such is an issue long debated since industrialization’s inceptions, and finds a wide field of discussion through the scope of prefabrication. The latter has long been the object of architectural interest, and yet the bulk of its developments has mostly occurred outside

278

an official architectural history. This fact is on its own indicative of biases in architectural circles. However, it is clear that architecture must search for alternative ways of endorsement. Architects who want to keep designing buildings have to unavoidably bond architecture with the business language, as well as an industrial language. As demographics evolve in a crowded world, maybe a certain romantic idea of a ‘genius loci’ becomes as important as the (apparent) industrial and business related trends of lean production and mass- customization. Besides, in many circumstances, producing new meanings through design seems less relevant than providing effective, technically fit answers to urgent demands. The house problem has shifted throughout the centuries, but persists as a problem. Perhaps the architectural profession can be faced more as a technical métier, maybe it can persist attached to a certain ‘Beaux Arts’ paradigm or other canonical nuances. The problems of the built environment are nonetheless out there.

[9] It is the architecture’s task to make non-discriminatory use of everything available to it, in order to provide an ethical and responsible answer in the integration of the built environment with the social fabric and the natural environment.

[10] Prefabrication is not an end-in-itself.

[11] Architecture is not an end-in-itself.

279

280

Bibliography

'Airbus'. (2015). How is an aircraft built? Retrieved 2015.07.01, from http://www.airbus.com/company/aircraft-manufacture/how-is-an-aircraft-built/ 'Aladdin'. (2001). Aladdin Company of Bay City. Clarke Historical Library. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from http://clarke.cmich.edu/resource_tab/resource_tab_index.html 'ARA'. (2012). The Housing Finance and Development Centre in Finland. Retrieved 2012.09.24, from www.ara.fi 'Building'. (2014). Building Construction. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.britannica.com/technology/building-construction 'Forbes'. (2015). Global 2000 - Forbes. Retrieved 2015.07.01, from www.forbes.com/global2000/ 'Froebel Gifts'. (2008). Froebel Gifts. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from www.froebelweb.org 'Girders'. (2011). Girders and Gears, Prismatrix Inc. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from www.girdersandgears.com 'Lincoln Logs'. (2011). Lincoln Logs, Hasbro Inc. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from lincolnlogs.knex.com/ 'Palladian'. (2010). Center for Palladian Studies in America. Retrieved 2012.04.27, from www.palladiancenter.org 'Palladio's'. (2010). Palladio’s Literary Predecessors. Center for Palladian Studies in America. Retrieved 2012.04.27, from http://www.palladiancenter.org/predecessors.html 'Palladio's Literary Predecessors'. (2010). Palladio’s Literary Predecessors. Center for Palladian Studies in America. Retrieved 2012.04.27, from http://www.palladiancenter.org/predecessors.html 'Palladio and Britain'. (2011). Palladio and Britain, I Quattro Libri dell' Architettura. Architecture.com : Royal Institute of British Architects. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from http://www.architecture.com/LibraryDrawingsAndPhotographs/Palladio/DrawingsAnd Publications/IQuattroLibri.aspx 'SCB'. (2012). SCB Statistics Sweden: Yearbook on Housing and Building Statistics 2012. Retrieved 2012.09.21, from http://www.scb.se 'Statistics DK'. (2012). Statistics Denmark: Statistical Yearbook 2012. Retrieved 2012.09.24, from www.dst.dk/en 'Statistics FI'. (2012). Statistics Finland. Retrieved 2012.09.24, from www.stat.fi/index_en.html

281

'Statistics NL'. (2014). Statistics Netherlands: Construction and Housing. Retrieved 2014.07.01, from www.csb.nl 'Statistics NO'. (2012). Statistics Norway. Retrieved 2012.09.24, from www.ssb.no/english/ 'Statistics US'. (2011). US Census Bureau: Census of Housing. Retrieved 2012.09.18, from http://www.census.gov/housing/census/ 'The National Archives'. (2008). Inter-departmental Committee on House Construction (Burt Committee): Minutes, Papers and Reports. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/details/C8789-details 'University of the West of England'. (2013). System Building. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.uwe.port.ac.uk/industbld/Index.htm Aalto, A. (1994). The architectural drawings of Alvar Aalto, 1917-1939. Vol.7, Buildings and plans for the A. Ahlström Company in Varkaus, and type houses, 1937-1939. New York; London: Garland. Ábalos, I. (2003). A boa-vida : visita guiada às casas da modernidade [English version - The Good Life: A Guided Visit to the Houses of Modernity] (A. D. Penna, Trans.). Barcelona: Gustavo Gili. Agrawal, A. (2009). Product Networks, Component Modularity and Sourcing. Journal of technology management & innovation, 4(1), 59-81. Agrest, D. (1991). Architecture from without : theoretical framings for a critical practice. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Agudin, L. M. (1995). The Concept of Type in Architecture: An Inquiry Into the Nature of Architectural Form: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich. Ahlava, A. (2002). Architecture in Consumer Society: University of Art and Design Helsinki. Aicher, O. (2001). Analógico y Digital: Editorial Gustavo Gili, S.L. Albrecht, D., & Crawford, M. (Eds.). (1995). World War II and the American Dream: How Wartime Building Changed a Nation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, National Building Museum. Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the synthesis of form. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Alexander, C. (1979). The timeless way of building. New York: Oxford University Press. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A pattern language : towns, buildings, construction. New York: Oxford University Press. Alonso-Zandari, S., & Hashemi, A. (2017). Prefabrication in the UK housing construction industry. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Zero Energy Mass Customised Housing - ZEMCH 2016, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Anderson, S. (2000). Peter Behrens and a new architecture for the twentieth century. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Andreotti, L., & Costa, X. (Eds.). (1996). Situacionistas: arte, política, urbanismo: Museu d'Art Contemporani de Barcelona. Andrews, D., Sánchez, A. C., & Johansson, Å. (2011). Housing Markets and Structural Policies in OECD Countries. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, (No. 836). http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kgk8t2k9vf3-en Arendt, H. (2013). The Human Condition: Second Edition: University of Chicago Press.

282

Arieff, A., & Burkhart, B. (2002). Prefab (1st ed.). Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith. Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye: University of California Press. Arnheim, R. (2009). The Dynamics of Architectural Form: Based on the 1975 Mary Duke Biddle Lectures at the Cooper Union: University of California. Arribas, I., Pérez, F., & Tortosa-Ausina, E. (2009). Measuring Globalization of International Trade: Theory and Evidence. World Development, 37(1), 127-145. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.03.009 Atkin, B. (1999). Innovation in the Construction Sector. European Council for Construction Research, Development and Innovation Retrieved from www.eccredi.org/downloads/innovation.pdf. Augé, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity: Verso Books. Aymonino, C. (1976). La vivienda racional : ponencias de los congresos CIAM 1929-1930. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili. Bachelard, G. (1994). The poetics of space (M. Jolas & J. R. Stilgoe, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press. Balakrishnan, V. K. (1991). Introductory discrete mathematics. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. ; London: Prentice Hall. Ballard, G., & Arbulu, R. (2004). Making prefabrication lean. Proceedings of 12th International Group for Lean Construction Conference, Elsinore, Denmark. Banham, R. (1955). The New Brutalism. The Architectural Review, 354-361. Banham, R. (2002). The Ford century : Ford Motor Company and the innovations that shaped the world (1st ed.). New York: Artisan. Barlow, J., & Ozaki, R. (2005). Building mass customised housing through innovation in the production system: lessons from Japan. Environment and Planning A, 37(1), 9-20. doi: 10.1068/a3579 Barthes, R. (1972). Critical essays. Evanston Ill.: Northwestern University Press. Barthes, R. (1977). Image, music, text (S. Heath, Trans.). New York: Hill and Wang. Barthes, R. (1993). Elementos de semiologia (I. Blikstein, Trans.). São Paulo: Editora Cultrix. Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and simulation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Belsey, C. (2002). Poststructuralism: A Very Short Introduction: OUP Oxford. Benevolo, L. (2009). O último capítulo da arquitectura moderna (J. E. Rodil, Trans. Reimp. ed.). Lisboa: Edições 70. Benjaafar, S., & Sheikhzadeh, M. (1995). Batch sizing models for flexible manufacturing cells: Working paper, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota. Benjamin, W. (2008). The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. London: Penguin. Bergdoll, B. (2008). Home Delivery: Fabricating the Modern Dwelling. New York: Museum of Modern Art. Bergdoll, B., Christensen, P., & Broadhurst, R. (2008). Home Delivery: Fabricating the Modern Dwelling. New York: Museum of Modern Art. Berger, J. (1972). Ways of Seeing. London, Harmondsworth: BBC, Penguin Books.

283

Berger, J., & Savage, J. (2005). Berger on drawing. Aghabullogue, Co. Cork, Ireland: Occasional Press. Bertalanffy, L. v. (1969). General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. New York: G. Braziller. Bigott, J. C. (2005). Ballon Frame Construction. The Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago. Chicago: Chicago Historical Society. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/105.html Blundell-Jones, P. (2002). Modern Architecture Through Case Studies. Oxford: Architectural Press. Bock, T. (2006). Lightweight constructions and systems. Detail, 07/08 2006, 759. Brand, S. (1995). How buildings learn: what happens after they're built. London: Penguin Books. Brauckmann, S. (1999). Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901-1972). International Society for the Systems Sciences. Retrieved 2013.06.01, from http://www.isss.org/lumLVB.htm Breatore, M. Q. (2013). The Contingent Authenticity of the Farnsworth House. (PhD), New York University. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/3489748/The_Contingent_Authenticity_of_the_Farnsworth_House Brock, L., & Brown, J. (2000). The prefabricated house in the twenty-first century: What can we learn from Japan? A case study of the KST-Hokkaido house. Paper presented at the World Conference on Timber Engineering, Whistler Resort, British Columbia, Canada July 31 - August 3. http://timber.ce.wsu.edu/Resources/papers/4-2-3.pdf Burch, R. (2013). Charles Sanders Peirce. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 ed.). Calabuig, D. D., Gomez, R. C., & Ramos, A. A. (2013). The Strategies of Mat-Building. The Architectural Review(January). Calinescu,̆ M. (1987). Five faces of modernity : modernism, avant-garde, decadence, kitsch, postmodernism. Durham: Duke University Press. Canizaro, V. B. (Ed.). (2007). Architectural regionalism : collected writings on place, identity, modernity, and tradition. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Castells, M. (2002). A Sociedade em Rede - A Era da Informação : Economia, Sociedade e Cultura, Vol 1 [English version: The Rise of the Network Society, The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol I]. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Chen, C. (2008). Developing a Computer Assisted Risk Assessment System for International Construction Projects: Report From an Ongoing Study CIB W112 International Conference on Multi-National Construction Projects: Securing High Performance Through Cultural Awareness and Dispute Avoidance (pp. approx. 10 p.). Rotterdam (Netherlands): in-house publishing. Ching, F. (2007). Architecture: form, space, and order (3rd ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. Collymore, P. (1994). The architecture of Ralph Erskine (Rev. ed.). London: Academy Editions. Colomina, B. (1998). Privacy and publicity : modern architecture as mass media. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press. Conrads, U. (1970). Programs and Manifestoes on 20th-century Architecture: MIT Press. Cook, P. (Ed.). (1999). Archigram. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Cornelis, A. (1967). Definition and Properties of the Concept of Structure as a Methodical Tool in the Sciences of Man. Philosophica, 5, 101-135.

284

Correia, A. L., Murtinho, V., & Simões da Silva, L. (2011). Customização em massa de habitação: Questões e enquadramento para um desenvolvimento prático com recurso a aço enformado a frio. Paper presented at the VIII Congresso de Construção Metálica e Mista, Guimarães. Correia, A. L., Murtinho, V., & Simões da Silva, L. (2017). Steel and modularity in architectural creation. Paper presented at the XI Congresso de Construção Metálica e Mista, Coimbra. Correia, A. L., Silva, L. S., & Murtinho, V. (2012). Housing Prefabrication: Background for a conceptual development of the Architectural Project. Paper presented at the Congresso ITeCons Construção 2012, Coimbra. Correia, A. L., Simões da Silva, L., & Murtinho, V. (2013). Housing industrialization, success and failure, universal and local: Limits for housing globalization. Paper presented at the ICSA 2013 - International Conference Structures and Architecture, Guimarães. Correia, A. L., Simões da Silva, L., & Murtinho, V. (2016). A Structuralist View of Prefabrication. Paper presented at the ICSA 2016 - International Conference Structures and Architecture, Guimarães. Craige, B. J. (1982). Literary relativity : an essay on twentieth-century narrative. Lewisburg N.J.: Bucknell University Press. Crowley, A. (1998). Construction as a manufacturing process: Lessons from the automotive industry. Computers & Structures, 67(5), 389-400. doi: 10.1016/s0045-7949(97)00147-8 Cullen, G. (1988). Paisagem urbana. Lisboa: Edições 70. Damásio, A. R. (1996). O Erro de Descartes: Emoção, Razão e Cérebro Humano (D. Vicente & G. Segurado, Trans. 16th ed.). Lisbon: Europa-América. Davies, C. (1993). Hopkins : the work of Michael Hopkins and Partners. London: Phaidon. Davies, C. (2005). The prefabricated home. London: Reaktion. Delius, C. (Ed.). (2001). História da Filosofia: da Antiguidade aos Dias de Hoje: Könemann. Descartes, R. (1637). Discourse on the Method. Retrieved (2013.01.01) from Project Guttenberg (2008): www.gutenberg.org/files/59/59-h/59-h.htm. Descartes, R. (1644). The Principles of Philosophy. Retrieved (2013.01.01) from Project Guttenberg (2003): www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/4391/pg4391.html. Dias, M. G. (2003). O românico foi uma maneira internacional, cada corporação tem a imagem que merece e os arquitectos podem-se exportar. NU. Dijk, H. v. (1999). Twentieth-century architecture in the Netherlands. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Downie, A. (2015, 2015.04.01). Brazil World Cup grounds up for sale following cash flow problems [Reuters]. Retrieved 2015.04.15, from http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/04/01/uk- soccer-brazil-stadiums-idUKKBN0MS4RP20150401 Doxiadis, C. A. (1968). Ekistics : an introduction to the science of human settlements. London: Hutchinson. Dripps, R. D. (1997). The First House: Myth, Paradigm, and the Task of Architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Duarte, J. P. (1995). Tipo e Módulo: Uma Abordagem ao Processo de Produção de Habitação. Lisboa: LNEC.

285

Duarte, J. P. (2000). Customizing mass housing: a discursive grammar for Siza's Malagueira houses. (PhD Thesis in Architecture), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/8189 Dudley, G. A. (1994). A workshop for peace: designing the United Nations headquarters: Architectural History Foundation. Duffy, F. (1993). Measuring building performance. Facilities, 8(5), 17-20. Dwell Magazine. (2012). Retrieved 2012.06.09, from www.dwell.com Eagleton, T. (1996). Literary theory : an introduction (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press. Eco, U. (1991). A estrutura ausente : introdução à pesquisa semiológica (7th ed.). São Paulo: Perspectiva. Edge, M. (2002). Overcoming Client and Market Resistance to Prefabrication and Standardisation in Housing. Aberdeen: Robert Gordon University. Egan, J. (1998). Rethinking Construction - Construction Task Force to the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott. London: Department of Trade and Industry. Egan, J., & Strategic Forum for Construction (Eds.). (2002). Accelerating Change London: Rethinking Construction. Eldemery, I. M. (2009). Globalization Challenges in Architecture. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 26(4), 343. Eliade, M. (1959). Cosmos and history : the myth of the eternal return. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers. Eliade, M. (1992). O sagrado e o profano (R. Fernandes, Trans.). Lisboa: Livros do Brasil. Eliasson, O. (2012). Olafur Eliasson. from http://www.olafureliasson.net English Housing Survey team. (2015). English Housing Survey: Households. London: Department for Communities and Local Government. ETU. (2007). Understanding Globalization. Education and Training Unit for Democracy and Development. Retrieved 2012.04.12, from http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/development/globalisation.html Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union (23 April 2009). On the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC (2009). European Commission. (2013). Industry Policy Indicators and Analysis. Directorate General Enterprise and Industry - Unit A4 "Industrial Competitiveness Policy for Growth" - European Union Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/industrial- competitiveness/economic-crisis/monthly_notes_en.htm. Eurostat. (2013). Construction statistics - NACE Rev. 2. Eurostat, Statistics Explained: European Commission. Evers, B., & Thoenes, C. (2003). Architectural Theory: From the Renaissance to the Present : 89 Essays on 117 Treatises. Cologne: Taschen. Feliciano, A. M. (2009). A redescoberta cultural da "Cidade Organísmica" proposta pelo "Team X". Artitextos, (8), 103-109. http://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/1481

286

Fitchen, J. (1981). The Construction of Gothic Cathedrals: A Study of Medieval Vault Erection: University of Chicago Press. Fletcher, G. A. (1987). The Keynesian revolution and its critics : issues of theory and policy for the monetary production economy. New York: St. Martin's Press. Foucault, M. (1967). Of Other Spaces, Heterotopias. Diacritics (1986) (Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 22-27): Spring. Foucault, M. (1983). This is not a pipe. Berkeley: University of California Press. Frampton, K. (1995). Studies in tectonic culture : the poetics of construction in nineteenth and twentieth century architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Frampton, K. (2002). Labour, work and architecture : collected essays on architecture and design. London ; New York: Phaidon Press. Frampton, K. (2007a). The evolution of 20th century architecture : a synoptic account. Wien ; New York: Springer. Frampton, K. (2007b). Modern architecture : a critical history (4th ed.). London ; New York, N.Y.: Thames & Hudson. Frankl, P. (1968). Principles of architectural history; the four phases of architectural style, 1420-1900. Cambridge, Mass.,: MIT Press. Frey, A. (1999). In search of a living architecture. Santa Monica, CA: Hennessey + Ingalls. Fromm, E. (1966). Marxism, Psychoanalysis and Reality [in Tagebuch. Monatshefte für Kultur, Politik, Wirtschaft, Band 21 (No. 9, 1966), pp. 5-6]. Retrieved 2013.06.01, from https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1966/psychoanalysis.htm Fulcher, M. (2011). Rem Koolhaas turns back on cities. Architects Journal. http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/rem-koolhaas-turns-back-on- cities/8621130.article Fuller, R. B., Krausse, J., & Lichtenstein, C. (1999). Your private sky : R. Buckminster Fuller, the art of design science. Baden: Museum fur̈ Gestaltung Zurich.,̈ L. Muller.̈ Fumiaki, K. (2003). Opportunity and Challenge Changing Housing Market in Japan. Osaka: Japan Management Association. Gannon, T. (2017). Reyner Banham and the Paradoxes of High Tech. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute. Gervásio, H. (2010). Sustainable Design and Integral Life-Cycle: Analysis of Bridges. (PhD), University of Coimbra, Coimbra. Gibb, A. G. F. (1998). Off-site fabrication : prefabrication, pre-assembly and modularisation. Latheronwheel: Whittles. Giddens, A. (2004). Sociologia [English version: Sociology, 4th edition]. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Giedion, S. (1941). Space, time and architecture; the growth of a new tradition. Cambridge, London: The Harvard University Press; H. Milford, Oxford University Press. Giedion, S. (2004). Espaço, tempo e arquitetura: o desenvolvimento de uma nova tradição: Martins Fontes. Gil, J. (2001). Movimento total : o corpo e a dança (M. S. Pereira, Trans.). Lisboa: Relógio d'água. Gil, J. (2010). A arte como linguagem : a "última lição". Lisboa: Relógio D'água.

287

Girault, J. (1998). Ouvriers en banlieue, XIXe-XXe siècle. Paris: Editions de l'atelier / Editions ouvrières. GLA. (2013). Census Snapshots. London: Great London Authority Intelligence Unit - Census Information Scheme Retrieved from http://data.london.gov.uk/census/snapshots. Goldhoorn, B. (2002). Microrayon. Project Russia, 25. Golub, J., & Frey, A. (1999). Albert Frey houses 1 + 2. New York, NY.: Princeton Architectural Press. Gomes, R. J. (1978). Necessidades humanas e exigências funcionais da habitação. Lisboa: LNEC. Gonçalves, J. F. (2012). Motivation and consequence of travelling in the architecture of Le Corbusier: Voyage d’Orient and Latin-american travel. Cadernos PROARQ 18, 195-214. Goodheart, A. (1996). Why Dolores Chumsky hates Thomas Edison. Discovery.com . Retrieved 2013.01.01, from http://flyingmoose.org/truthfic/edison.htm Grassi, G. (1983). La costruzione logica dell'architettura (4th ed.). Venezia: Marsilio. Grassi, G. (2003). Arquitectura, lengua muerta y otros escritos. Barcelona: Ediciones del Serbal. Greven, H. A., & Baldauf, A. S. F. (2007). Introdução à coordenação modular da construção no Brasil: Uma abordagem atualizada. Porto Alegre: ANTAC. Gropius, W. (1919). Bauhaus Manifesto and Program. Retrieved from Bauhaus Online website: www.thelearninglab.nl/resources/Bauhaus-manifesto.pdf Gropius, W. (1955). Scope of total architecture (1st ed.). New York,: Harper. Gropius, W. (1965). The new architecture and the Bauhaus. Cambridge, Mass.,: M.I.T. Press. Guidot, R. (Ed.). (1983). Architecture et industrie: passé et avenir d'un mariage de raison. Exhibition catalogue, Centre Georges Pompidou. Paris: Centre de Création Industrielle. Gutman, R. (1988). Architectural practice: a critical view: Princeton Architectural Press. Habraken, N. J. (1972). Supports: an alternative to mass housing. New York,: Praeger Publishers. Habraken, N. J. (1976). Variations : the systematic design of supports. Cambridge, Mass.: Laboratory of Architecture and Planning at MIT. Habraken, N. J. (1988a). The Appearance of the Form (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Awater Press (Private Edition). Habraken, N. J. (1988b). Type as a Social Agreement. Paper presented at the Asian Congress of Architects, Seoul. Habraken, N. J., & Mignucci, A. (2009). Soportes: vivienda y ciudad - Supports: housing and city. Barcelona: Universitat de Catalunya. Habraken, N. J., & Teicher, J. (1998). The structure of the ordinary : form and control in the built environment. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Hall, E. T. (1990). The hidden dimension. New York: Anchor Books. Hammond, E. (2011). Construction: Across Europe, small builders find they are fighting a losing battle. Finantial Times. Retrieved from Finantial Times - Global property insight website: http://globalpropertyinsight.ft.com/#/articles/10 Hansen, B. G. (2005). Gilbert Erector Set Guidebook 1913-1988, A. C. Gilbert Heritage Society. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from www.acghs.org

288

Harrison, H., Mullin, S., Reeves, B., & Stevens, A. (Eds.). (2004). Non-traditional Houses: Identifying non- traditional houses in the UK 1918-75. Digital Edition 2012: IHS BRE Press. Harvey, D. (2005). The condition of postmodernity : an enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Oxford England ; Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell. Hastak, M., & Shaked, A. (2000). ICRAM-1: Model for international construction risk assessment. Journal of Management in Engineering, 16(1), 59-69. Hawking, S. W. (2001). The universe in a nutshell. New York: Bantam Books. Hays, K. M. (1998). Oppositions reader : selected readings from a journal for ideas and criticism in architecture, 1973-1984. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Heidegger, M. (1951). Building Dwelling Thinking. Retrieved 2011.02.13, from http://mysite.pratt.edu/~everbake/Pratt%20Readings/Heidegger.pdf Heidegger, M. (2002). Off the beaten track (J. Young & K. Haynes, Trans.). Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press. Heidegger, M. (2005). Ser e Tempo : Parte I (15 ed.). Petrópolis: Editora Vozes. Heisenberg, W. (2000). Physics & Philosophy : The Revolution in Modern Science. London: Penguin Books. Hellgardt, M. (1987). Martin Wagner: the work of building in the era of its technical reproduction. Construction History, 3, 95-114. Herbert, G. (1978). Pioneers of prefabrication : the British contribution in the nineteenth century. Baltimore ; London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Herod, A. (2009). Geographies of globalization : a critical introduction. Malden, MA ; Oxford: Wiley- Blackwell. Hertzberger, H. (2000). Space and the Architect : Lessons in Architecture 2. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Hertzberger, H. (2002). Herman Hertzberger : articulations. Munich London: Prestel. Hertzberger, H. (2005). Lessons for students in architecture (5th ed.). Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Hertzberger, H. (2010) Schools of thought: Herman Hertzberger/Interviewer: J. Payne. Architecture Today. Heuvel, D. v. d., Risselada, M., Colomina, B., Smithson, A. M., Smithson, P., & Design Museum (London England). (2004). Alison and Peter Smithson : from the House of the Future to a house of today. Rotterdam: 010 Pub. Heynen, H. (1999). Architecture and modernity : a critique. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. HFH. (2012). Habitat for Humanity. www.habitat.org Hillier, B. (1996). Space is the machine : a configurational theory of architecture. Cambridge ; New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Hinkelman, E. G., & Putzi, S. (2005). Dictionary of International Trade: Handbook of the Global Trade Community Includes 21 Key Appendices: World Trade Press. Hitchcock, A. S. (1921). The Type Concept in Systematic Botany. American Journal of Botany, 8(5, May), 251-255. doi: 10.2307/2434993 Hitchcock, H. R., & Johnson, P. (1932). The international style: architecture since 1922 (lst ed.). New York,: W. W. Norton & company.

289

Home, M., & Taanila, M. (2002). Futuro: Tomorrow's House from Yesterday: Desura. Hothersall, D. (2004). History of psychology (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Housing Forum. (2002). Homing in on excellence: A commentary on the use of off-site fabrication methods for the UK housebuilding industry. London: Housing Forum. Huggett, N., & Hoefer, C. (2015). Absolute and Relational Theories of Space and Motion. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2015 ed.). Hughes, T. (2010). Four Steel Walls. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.foursteelwalls.co.uk Hüttemann, A. (2017). Structuralism, causation and explanation. Synthese, 194(7), 2251-2253. doi: 10.1007/s11229-017-1465-1 Ibach, M. (2003). Timber-frame Houses in the Historic American Buildings Survey. The Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Reading Room. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/list/100_tim.html IEP. (2005). Aristotle. IEP Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. www.iep.utm.edu Imperiale, A. (2012). An American wartime dream: 'The Packaged House' system of Konrad Wachsmann and Walter Gropius. Paper presented at the 2012 ACSA Fall Conference / Modular Building Institute, Temple University, Philadelphia. INSEE. (2010). IMG1B - Les immigrés par sexe, âge et pays de naissance (Pays de naissance détaillé) - Région d'Île-de-France (11). France: Institut National de la Statistique et des Études Économiques Retrieved from http://insee.fr/. International Standards Organization. (1983). Modular Coordination. ISO 1006:1983. Jacob, C. (1992). L'empire des cartes : approche théorique de la cartographie à travers l'histoire. Paris: A. Michel. Jencks, C. (1987). The language of post-modern architecture (5th. ed.). London: Academy Editions. Jencks, C. (2002). The new paradigm in architecture : the language of post-modern architecture ([7th ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press. Johnson, W. (2007). Lessons from Japan: A comparative study of the market drivers for prefabrication in Japanese and UK private housing development. UCL (University College London). Jones, D. E. (2010). Fast, Cheap and in Control. Paper presented at the 98th ACSA Annual Meeting Proceedings, Rebuilding, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA. Kaila, A. M. (2016). Moduli 225: A Gem of Modern Architecture: Aalto University, School of Art and Design. Kant, I. (2013). The Critique of Pure Reason Retrieved from www.gutenberg.org/files/4280/4280- h/4280-h.htm Kärkkäinen, M. (Ed.). (1991). International Alvar Aalto Symposium (5 : 1991 : Jyväskylä), Functionalism - utopia or the way forward? Jyväskylä: Alvar Aalto Museum. Kavanaugh, L. J. (2007). The Architectonic of Philosophy: Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz: Amsterdam University Press. Keaton, B. (Writer). (1920). One Week. Kelly, B. (1951). The prefabrication of houses : a study by the Albert Farwell Bemis Foundation of the prefabrication industry in the United States. New York ; London: Chapman and Hall.

290

Kendall, S., & Teicher, J. L. (2000). Residential Open Building. London (United Kingdom): Tayler and Frances. Kenna, P. (2008). Globalization and Housing Rights. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 15(2), 397- 469. Kennedy, A. J. (2006). Bauhaus. London: Flame Tree. Kieran, S., & Timberlake, J. (2004). Refabricating architecture: how manufacturing methodologies are poised to transform building construction. New York: McGraw-Hill. Kinchin, J., & O'Connor, A. (2011). Counter Space: Design and the Modern Kitchen: Museum of Modern Art. Kirsch, K. (2013). The Weissenhofsiedlung: Experimental Housing Built for the Deutscher Werkbund, Stuttgart, 1927: Edition Axel Menges GmbH. Klein, A. (1980). Vivienda mínima 1906-1957. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili. Klingmann, A. (2007). Brandscapes : architecture in the experience economy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Knaack, U., Chung-Klatte, S., & Hasselbach, R. (2012). Prefabricated Systems: Principles of Construction: De Gruyter. Knight, T. W. (1989). Shape Grammars in Education and Practice: History and Prospects. http://www.mit.edu/~tknight/IJDC/ Koolhaas, R. (1994). Delirious New York: a retroactive manifesto for Manhattan: Monacelli Press. Korvenmaa, P. (1990). The Finnish Wooden House Transformed: American prefabrication, war-time housing and Alvar Aalto. Construction History, 6, 47-61. Korzybski, A. (1933). Science and sanity : an introduction to non-Aristotelian systems and general semantics (1st ed.). New York, NY; Lancaster, Pa: International Non-Aristotelian Library Pub. Co.; Science Press Printing Co., distributors. Kossak, F. (2012). An Architect's Tagwerk: Notes on Otto Steidle's work between the urban and the rural. ARQ: Architectural Research Quarterly, 15(04), 327-340. doi: 10.1017/S1359135512000097 Kostof, S. (1986). The Architect : chapters in the history of the profession. New York: Oxford University Press. Kostof, S. (1995). A History of Architecture : Settings and Rituals (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Krugman, P. (2008). The increasing returns revolution in trade and geography. Nobel Prize Lecture, December 8, 2008. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2008/krugman_lecture.p df Kunstler, J. H. (1998). The geography of nowhere : the rise and decline of America's man-made landscape: Touchstone Press. Kunstler, J. H. (2004). James Howard Kunstler: The ghastly tragedy of the suburbs [Video file]. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from http://www.ted.com/talks/james_howard_kunstler_dissects_suburbia#t- 138213

291

Lacan, J. (1966). The seminar of Jacques Lacan. Book XIV: The logic of phantasy 1966-1967. (Gallagher, C., Trans.). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10788/163 Lagerlund, H. (Ed.). (2007). Forming the mind : essays on the internal senses and the mind/body problem from Avicenna to the medical enlightenment. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Laszlo, A., & Krippner, S. (1997). Systems Theories: Their Origins, Foundations, and Development. In J. S. Jordan (Ed.), Systems Theories and A Priori Aspects of Perception (pp. 47-74). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. Laugier, M. A. (1755). An Essay on Architecture. London: T. Osborne and Shipton. Lavin, S. (1992). Quatremere de Quincy: MIT Press. Lawmart. (2015). Copyright vs Trademark vs Patent. Retrieved 2015.06.01, from www.lawmart.com/forms/difference.htm Le Corbusier. (1967). [La Ville radieuse.] The Radiant city. Elements of a doctrine of urbanism to be used as the basis of our machine-age civilization (D. Coltman, P. Knight, & E. Levieux, Trans.). London; Gouda printed: Faber & Faber. Le Corbusier. (1973). The Athens Charter. New York,: Grossman Publishers. Le Corbusier. (1980). Modulor I and II. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Le Corbusier. (1986). Towards a New Architecture. New York: Dover Publications. Le Corbusier. (2007). A viagem do Oriente: Cosac Naify. LeCuyer, A. W. (Ed.). (1996). Richard Horden : Light Architecture. Ann Harbor, Michigan: College of Architecture + Urban Planning, The University of Michigan. Lefebvre, H. (2005). The production of space. Oxford, OX, UK ; Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell. Leupen, B. (2006). Frame and generic space. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Lévi-Strauss, C. (1979). Myth and meaning. New York: Schocken Books. Levinson, M. (2006). The box : how the shipping container made the world smaller and the world economy bigger. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Lewis, M. (2013). The History of Iron-Prefab Housing. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from http://livingsteel.org/article/the-history-of-iron-prefab-housing Lewontin, R. (2011). The Genotype/Phenotype Distinction. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 ed.). Lihotzky, G. (1927). Rationalization in the Household. In A. Kaes, M. Jay, & E. Dimendberg (Eds.), The Weimar Republic Sourcebook (Vol. 3 of Weimar and Now: German Cultural Criticism, pp. 462-465): University of California Press. Lobos, D., & Donath, D. (2010). The problem of the space layout in architecture: A survey and reflections. Arquiteturarevista, 6(2), 136-161. doi: 10.4013/arq.2010.62.05 Luchinger,̈ A. (1981). Strukturalismus in Architektur und Stadtebaü = Structuralism in architecture and urban planning. Stuttgart: Krämer. Luchins, A. S. (1942). Mechanization in problem solving; the effect of einstellung. Evanston, Ill.,: The American Psychological Association.

292

Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Cambridge, Mass. ; London: M.I.T. Press. Mach, E. (1919). The Science of Mechanics : a critical and historical account of its development (4th Ed. ed.). Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Co. Machado, R., & Geuze, A. (2005). Residential waterfront, Borneo Sporenberg, Amsterdam. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Graduate School of Design. Magritte, R. (1929). Les Mots et les Images. La Révolution Surréaliste(12), 32-33. Mandelson, P. (2010). Is The Banking Crisis A Crisis For Globalization? Forbes. Retrieved from Forbes.com website: http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/03/banking-crisis-globalization- opinions-contributors-peter-mandelson.html Mankiw, N. G., & Weil, D. N. (1989). The Baby Boom, The Baby Bust, And The Housing Market. Regional Science and Urban Economics 19, 235-258. Marchal, J. H. (1975). On the Concept of a System. Philosophy of Science, 42(4), 448-468. Markie, P. (2015). Rationalism vs. Empiricism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2015 ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/rationalism-empiricism/. Marques, C. A. (2012). Habitação, Da indústria à fábrica da cidade. Casal de Cambra: Caleidoscópio. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York, London: Harper & Row. Matthews, S., & Reeves, B. (2012). Structural Assessment of Large Panel Systems (LPS) Dwelling Blocks for Accidental Loading. Garston, Watford: BRE. May, E. (1929). Flats for Subsistence Living. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from http://modernistarchitecture.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/ernst-may%E2%80%99s- %E2%80%9Cflats-for-subsistence-living%E2%80%9D-1929-2/ McBeth, D. G. (1998). Francois Hennebique (1842-1921), Reinforced Concrete Pioneer. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Civil Engineering, 126(2), 86-95. doi: 10.1680/icien.1998.30436 McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man: University of Toronto Press. Meadows, D. H., Randers, J., & Meadows, D. L. (2004). The limits to growth : the 30-year update. White River Junction, Vt: Chelsea Green Publishing Company. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The Primacy of Perception (And Other Essays on Phenomenological Psychology, the Philosophy of Art, History, and Politics). Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1992). O olho e o espírito. [Lisboa]: Vega. Mersmann, H. (2014). HOFINET - Housing Finance Information Network: Netherlands Country Profile. Retrieved 2014.07.01, from www.hofinet.org/countries/description.aspx?regionID=3&id=119 Miśkiewicz, J., & Ausloos, M. (2010). Has the world economy reached its globalization limit? Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 389(4), 797-806. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2009.10.029 Mitchell, B. (1965). Theory of Categories: Academic Press. Mitchell, W. J. (2000). E-topia : "Urban life, Jim--but not as we know it". Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Montaner, J. M. (2002). As Formas do séc.XX. Barcelona: Editorial Gustavo Gili.

293

Montaner, J. M., & Muxí, Z. (2011). Arquitectura y política ensayos para mundos alternativos. Barcelona: GG. Mornement, A., & Holloway, S. (2007). Corrugated Iron: Building on the Frontier: Pan Macmillan Limited. Mourão, J. F., & Pedro, J. B. (2010). Sustentabilidade Ambiental da Habitação (Relatório 239/2010 - NAU). Lisbon: Ed. LNEC. Mumford, E. P. (2000). The CIAM discourse on urbanism, 1928-1960. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Murtinho, V., Correia, A. L., Ferreira, H., Simões da Silva, L., Gervásio, H., Rebelo, C., . . . Rigueiro, C. (2010). Affordable Houses: Architectural Concepts of a Modular Steel Residential House. Paper presented at the ICSA 2010 - International Conference Structures and Architecture, Guimarães. Murtinho, V., Correia, A. L., Ferreira, H., Simões da Silva, L., Gervásio, H., & Santos, P. (2010a). Architectural Concept Of Multistorey Apartment Building In Light Steel Framing. Paper presented at the SSCS - International Symposium, Steel Structures: Culture & Sustainability. Murtinho, V., Correia, A. L., Ferreira, H., Simões da Silva, L., Gervásio, H., & Santos, P. (2010b). Architectural Concept Of Multistorey Apartment Building with Light Steel Framing. Steel Construction, Design and Research, 3 (Wiley Ernst & Sohn). doi: 10.1002/stco.201010023 Murtinho, V., Simões da Silva, L., Correia, A. L., Ferreira, H., Rebelo, C., Santos, P., . . . Mateus, D. (2009). Affordable Houses: Um Conceito Modelar De Habitação Unifamiliar Residencial. Paper presented at the VII Congresso de Construção Metálica e Mista, Lisbon. NAHB. (2014). National Association of Home Builders. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.nahb.org NAR. (2014). National Association of Realtors - Housing Affordability Index. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.realtor.org/topics/housing-affordability-index NESDE. (2005). A gaiola como génese da construção anti-sísmica. LNEC - Laboratónio Nacional de Engenharia Civil. Retrieved 2013.01.01, 2013, from http://www- ext.lnec.pt/LNEC/DE/NESDE/divulgacao/gaiol_const_sism.html Noguchi, M. (2010). Mass Custom Home. Retrieved 2013.01.01, from www.masscustomhome.com Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Genius loci : towards a phenomenology of architecture. New York: Rizzoli. Nord, T. (2008). Prefabrication strategies in the timber housing industry. Luleå University of Technology - Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Division of Structural Engineering. http://epubl.luth.se/1402-1544/2008/51/LTU-DT-0851-SE.pdf NUMBEO. (2014). NUMBEO. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.numbeo.com NYC. (2013). Population facts. New York City: The City of New York Retrieved from http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/census/pop_facts.shtml. O'Neill, R. V. (1986). A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems: Princeton University Press. Ochi, F. (2005). Housing & Home Warranty Programs World Research: Organization for Housing Warranty Japan Ockman, J., & Eigen, E. (1993). Architecture Culture, 1943-1968: A Documentary Anthology: Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation. Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota production system : beyond large-scale production. Cambridge, Mass.: Productivity Press.

294

Olhager, J. (2003). Strategic positioning of the order penetration point. International Journal of Production Economics, 85(3), 319-329. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00119-1 Oliver, P. (2007). Dwellings : the vernacular house world wide. London: Phaidon. OMA, Koolhaas, R., & Mau, B. (1995). S, M, L, XL : small, medium, large, extra-large. Rotterdam: 010 Publishers. Opel, A., & Opel, D. (Eds.). (2002). On architecture - Adolf Loos. Riverside, Calif.: Ariadne Press. Oshima, K. T. (2008). Postulating the Potential of Prefab: The Case of Japan. In B. Bergdoll, P. Christensen, & R. Broadhurst (Eds.), Home Delivery: Fabricating the Modern Dwelling (pp. 32- 37). New York: Museum of Moderrn Art. Ostaric, L. (2009). Kant’s Account of Nature’s Systematicity and the Unity of Theoretical and Practical Reason. Inquiry, 52(2), 155-178. doi: 10.1080/00201740902790235 Pahl, G., Wallace, K., Blessing, L. n., & Pahl, G. (2007). Engineering design : a systematic approach (3rd ed.). London: Springer. Pallasmaa, J. (1991). From Metaphorical to Ecological Functionalism. Paper presented at the International Alvar Aalto Symposium (5 : 1991 : Jyväskylä), Functionalism - utopia or the way forward?, Jyväskylä. Pallasmaa, J. (1996). The eyes of the skin : architecture and the senses. London: Academy Editions. Pallasmaa, J. (2009). The Thinking Hand : Existential and Embodied Wisdom in Architecture. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley. Palumbo, M. L. (2000). New wombs : electronic bodies and architectural disorders. Basel: Birkhäuser. Paola, P. d. (2013). Toward a Rational Architectural Practice: The Particular Case of Giorgio Grassi. Paper presented at the 2013 ARCC Architectural Research Conference, University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Parkes, G. (2011). Japanese Aesthetics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/japanese-aesthetics/ Passanti, F. (1997). The Vernacular, Modernism, and Le Corbusier. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 56(4), 438-451. Pawley, M. (1973). The private future. Causes and consequences of community collapse in the West. London: Thames and Hudson. Pearson, C., & Delatte, N. (2005). Ronan Point Apartment Tower Collapse and its Effect on Building Codes. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 19(2), 172-177. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2005)19:2(172) Peirce, C. S. (1931-58). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Persaud, T. V. N., Loukas, M., & Tubbs, R. S. (2014). A History of Human Anatomy: Charles C Thomas Pub Limited. Pevsner, N. (1969). Ruskin and Viollet-le-Duc: Englishness and Frenchness in the appreciation of Gothic architecture. London: Thames & Hudson. Phillipson, M., Scotland, B., & Lane, B. (2001). Defining the Sustainability of Prefabrication and Modular Process in Construction 36/08/328 cc2114 Interim Report. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1997). The Child's Conception of Space: Routledge.

295

Piñar, C. F. (2013). El AA-system de Alvar Aalto: análisis constructivo. Evolución entre la 1ª y la 2ª serie Paper presented at the Octavo Congreso Nacional de Historia de la Construcción, 9-12 de Octubre de 2013, Madrid. Pine II, B. J. (1993). Mass Customization: The New Frontier in Business Competition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Pine II, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1997). The Four Faces of Mass Customization. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from Harvard Business Review website: www.hbr.org Pine II, B. J., Victor, B., & Boynton, A. C. (1993). Making Mass Customization Work. Harvard Business Review, 107-116. Pittini, A. (2012). Housing Affordability in the EU: Current situation and recent trends Research Briefing. Online resource: CECODHAS Housing Europe’s Observatory. Pittini, A., & Laino, E. (2011). Housing Europe Review : The nuts and bolts of European social housing systems. Brussels, Belgium: CECODHAS Housing Europe's Observatory. Plato. (1998). Timaeus (B. Jowett, Trans.): Retrieved (2013.01.01) from Project Guttenberg (2013): www.gutenberg.org/files/1572/1572-h/1572-h.htm. Ramos, F. V. (2013). Team 10: Manifesto de Doorn. arq.urb(9), 159-168. Rapoport, A. (1969). House form and culture. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,: Prentice-Hall. Rapoport, A. (2005). Culture, architecture, and design: Locke Science Pub. Co. Reardon, C., McGee, C., & Milne, G. (2013). Thermal Mass. Australian Government. Retrieved from www.yourhome.gov.au/passive-design/thermal-mass. Reed, P. (Ed.). (1998). Alvar Aalto: Between Humanism and Materialism. New York: Museum of Modern Art. Reiff, D. D. (2000). Houses from books : treatises, pattern books, and catalogs in American architecture, 1738- 1950 : a history and guide. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press. Risselada, M., & Van Den Heuvel, D. (Eds.). (2005). Team 10: 1953 - 81, in Search of a Utopia of the Present: NAi Publishers. Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169. doi: 10.1007/bf01405730 Robinson, D., Jamieson, C., Worthington, J., & Cole, C. (2011). The Future for Architects: RIBA Building Futures. Rodrik, D. (2012). The Nation-State Reborn. Project Syndicate. http://www.project- syndicate.org/commentary/rodrik67/English Rossi, A. (1969). L'Architettura della città. Padova: Marsilio. Rudofsky, B. (1977). The prodigious builders : notes toward a natural history of architecture with special regard to those species that are traditionally neglected or downright ignored. London: Secker and Warburg. Rudofsky, B. (1987). Architecture without architects : a short introduction to non-pedigreed architecture. Albuquerque: Museum of Modern Art (New York N.Y.); University of New Mexico Press. Ruohonen, K. (2013). Graph Theory Retrieved from http://math.tut.fi/~ruohonen/GT_English.pdf

296

Rybkowska, A., & Schneider, M. (2011). Housing conditions in Europe in 2009. European Union: Eurostat. Sadler, S. (2005). Archigram : Architecture Without Architecture. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Salingaros, N. A., & Tejada, D. M. (2001). Modularity and the Number of Design Choices. Nexus Network Journal, 3(1), 99-109. doi: 10.1007/s00004-000-0008-z Salvador, F., de Holan, P. M., & Peiller, F. (2009). Cracking the Code of Mass Customization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(3), 71-78. Sanchez, R., & Mahoney, J. T. (1996). Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 63-76. Santos, P., Mateus, D., Simões da Silva, L., Rebelo, C., Gervásio, H., Correia, A. L., . . . Rigueiro, C. (2010). Affordable Houses (Part II): Functional, Structural and Technological Performance. Paper presented at the ICSA 2010 - International Conference Structures and Architecture, Guimarães. Sanz, Y. O. (2013). Arne Jacobsen: Innovación y prefabricación. Paper presented at the Octavo Congreso Nacional de Historia de la Construcción, Madrid, 9-12 de octubre de 2013, Madrid. Sartre, J.-P. (1994). Being and nothingness. New York; Avenel, N.J.: Gramercy Books; Random House. Saussure, F. d. (1959). Course in general linguistics. New York: Philosophical Library. Scheuerman, W. (2010). Globalization. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2010 ed.). Schildt, G. (1994). Alvar Aalto : the complete catalogue of architecture, design, and art. London: Academy Editions. Schildt, G. (1998). Alvar Aalto in his own words. New York: Rizzoli International Publications. Schilling, M. A., & Hill, C. W. (1998). Managing the new product development process: strategic imperatives. The Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 67-81. Schlereth, T. J. (1982). Mail-Order Catalogs as Resources in American Culture Studies. Prospects, 7(1), 141-161. doi: 10.1017/S0361233300003495 Schneider, T., & Till, J. (2007). Flexible housing (1st ed.). Amsterdam ; Boston: Architectural Press, an imprint of Elsevier. Schomaker, T. M. (2003). Urban analysis of Onkel Toms Hütte. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from http://www.lostmodern.net/biglinks/en_onkeltom_web.pdf Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice : why more is less (1st ed.). New York: Ecco. Segal, W. (1953). Home and environment (2d. ed.). London,: L. Hill. Senaratne, S., Ekanayake, S., & Siriwardena, M. (2010). Lean Prefabrication: A Sustainable Approach. Paper presented at the 18th CIB World Building Congress, May 2010, Salford, UK (TG74 - Special Track, New Production and Business Models in Construction). Sergeant, J. (1976). Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian houses : the case for organic architecture. New York: Whitney Library of Design. Shennan, S. (2002). Genes, memes, and human history : Darwinian archaeology and cultural evolution. London: Thames & Hudson.

297

Silverman, A. (2012). Plato's Middle Period Metaphysics and Epistemology. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 ed.). Simmel, G. (1903). The Metropolis and Mental Life. In G. Bridge & S. Watson (Eds.), The Blackwell city reader (pp. 11-19). (2002). Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial: MIT Press. Simons, J. A., Irwin, D. B., & Drinnin, B. A. (1987). Psychology: The Search for Understanding: West Publishing Company. Sindicato Nacional dos Arquitectos. (1961). Arquitectura popular em Portugal. Lisboa: S.N.A. Smith, E. A. T., Shulman, J., & Gössel, P. (2002). Case study houses. Köln, London: Taschen. Smith, M. J. (2010). Henry B. Neef House. National Register of Historic Places. Retrieved 2014.01.01, from www.nebraskahistory.org/histpres/nebraska/douglas/DO09-Neef-House.pdf Smith, R. E. (2008). Lean Architecture: Toyota Homes. Paper presented at the 2008 UMass Wood Structures Symposium, Amherst. Smith, R. E. (2009). History of Prefabrication: A Cultural Survey. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Third International Congress on Construction History, Cottbus, May 2009. Smith, R. E. (2010). Prefab architecture: a guide to modular design and construction. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. Smithson, A. (1974). How to recognize and read mat-building. Mainstream architecture as it developed towards the mat-building. Architectural Design(9), 573-590. Some Assembly Required: Contemporary Prefabricated Houses. (2006). Retrieved 2012.06.09, from http://design.walkerart.org/prefab Sosa, M. E., Eppinger, S. D., & Rowles, C. M. (2007). A network approach to define modularity of components in complex products. Journal of mechanical design, 129(11), 1118-1129. Spoerl, J. S. (2004). A Brief History of Iron and Steel Production. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/h-carnegie-steel.htm Staib, G. (2008). Components and systems : Modular construction : design, structure, new technologies. Basel: Birkhäuser. Staib, G., Dörrhöfer, A., & Rosenthal, M. J. (2008). Components and systems : Modular construction : design, structure, new technologies. Basel: Birkhäuser. Stawinska, A. (2010). The EU-27 construction sector: from boom to gloom. Eurostat, Statistics in Focus: Eurostat, European Comission. Steinbeck, J. (1939). The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Viking Press. Stiny, G. (1980). Kindergarten grammars: designing with Froebel's building gifts. Environment and Planning B, 7(4), 409-462. doi: 10.1068/b070409 Stiny, G. (2006). Shape: Talking About Seeing and Doing. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Storr, W. (2011). Bulldozers home in on historic prefab estate: The battle to preserve Britain’s largest surviving estate of post-war prefab houses is over. The Telegraph. Retrieved from www.telegraph.co.uk/property/8701977/Bulldozers-home-in-on-historic-prefab- estate.html

298

Strauven, F. (1998). Aldo van Eyck : the shape of relativity. Amsterdam: Architectura & Natura. Sturrock, J. (1979). Structuralism and since: from Lévi Strauss to Derrida: Oxford University Press. Stuttgart. (2002). Weissenhofsiedlung - International Architecture Forum 2002. Retrieved 2013.06.01, from www.weissenhof2002.de Summerson, J. (1998). Heavenly mansions and other essays on architecture. New York: Norton. Swamidass, P. M. E. (2000) Encyclopedia of Production and Manufacturing Management. Boston, MA: Springer US. Sweeney, M. S. (2011). Brainworks : the mind-bending science of how you see, what you think, and who you are. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic. Tafuri, M. (1976). Architecture and utopia : design and capitalist development. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Tatum, C., Vanegas, J., & Williams, J. (1986). Constructability improvement using prefabrication, preassembly, and modularization. No.: Technical Report(297), 345. Távora, F. (1996). Da organização do espaço (3 ed.). Porto: FAUP. Taylor, F. W. (2007). The principles of scientific management (Reprinted ed.). Minneapolis: Filiquarian Publishing. Teige, K. (2002). The minimum dwelling. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts. Thompson, D. A. W. (1945). On Growth and Form (2nd ed.). Cambridge & New York: University Press & MacMillan Company. Thoreau, H. D. (2006). Walden, or Life in the woods. Penn State Electronic Classics Series (Original Pub. - Boston : Ticknor and Fields, 1854), Timmerman, K. (2012). Where am I wearing? : a global tour to the countries, factories, and people that make our clothes (2nd ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. Tobriner, S. (1997). Response of Traditional Wooden Japanese Construction. Retrieved 2013.06.01, from http://nisee.berkeley.edu/kobe/tobriner.html Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave. London: Pan books. Toussaint, M. (2012). Da Arquitectura à Teoria : Teoria da Arquitectura na primeira metade do século XX em Portugal. Casal de Cambra: Caleidoscópio. Toyota. (2013). Toyota Home. Retrieved 2013.06.01, from www.toyotahome.co.jp Turner, J. F. C. (1976). Housing by people : towards autonomy in building environments. London: Marion Boyars. Turner, J. F. C. (1976). Housing by people: towards autonomy in building environments. London: Marion Boyars. Ulrich, K. (1994). Fundamentals of Product Modularity. In S. Dasu & C. Eastman (Eds.), Management of Design: Engineering and Management Perspectives (pp. 219-231). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Ulrich, K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research policy, 24(3), 419-440.

299

Ulrich, K. T., & Eppinger, S. D. (2012). Product design and development (5th ed. ed.). New York: McGraw- Hill Higher Education ; London : McGraw-Hill [distributor]. Umland, A. (Ed.). (2013). Magritte: The Mystery of the Ordinary, 1926–1938. New York: MoMA Publications. UN-Habitat. (2006). World Urban Forum III. www.unhabitat.org UN. (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. www.un.org UN. (2000). United Nations Millenium Report. http://www.un.org/millennium/sg/report/index.html UN. (2011). Human Development Report 2011. www.hdr.undp.org UN HDR. (2010). Human Development Report 2010 UN - United Nations. Web resource: United Nations. Urban, F. (2013). Tower and Slab: Histories of Global Mass Housing: Taylor & Francis. UT. (2013). System Theory. Twente, The Netherlands: University of Twente. Retrieved 2013.06.01, from http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Communication%20Pr ocesses/System_Theory.doc/ Utzon, J., & Weston, R. (2009). Jørn Utzon Logbook V: Additive Architecture. Hellerup: Mogens Prip- Buus & Edition Bløndal. Vale, B. (1995). Prefabs : a history of the UK temporary housing programme (1st ed.). London: Spon. Valena, T. F., Avermaete, T., & Vrachliotis, G. (2011). Structuralism Reloaded?: Rule-Based Design in Architecture and Urbanism: Edition Axel Menges GmbH. van den Thillart, C. C. A. M. (2004). Customized Industrialization in the Residential Sector: Mass Customisation Modelling as a Tool for Benchmarking, Variation and Selection. Amsterdam: Sun. Van Eijck, J. (1995). Learning from paradox. Manuscript, CWI, Amsterdam. Vegesack, A. v., Dumont d'Ayot, C., & Reichlin, B. (2006). Jean Prouvé: The Poetics of the Technical Object (1st ed.). Weil am Rhein: Vitra Design Stiftung. Venables, T., & Courtney, R. (2004). Modern Methods of construction in Germany - playing the off- site rule. London: Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) Global Watch Service. Venturi, R. (1966). Complexity and contradiction in architecture. With a introd. by Vincent Scully. New York,: Museum of Modern Art; distributed by Doubleday, Garden City. Venturi, R., Scott Brown, D., & Izenour, S. (1972). Learning from Las Vegas. Cambridge, Mass.,: MIT Press. Virilio, P. (2000). Velocidade de libertação [English version: Open sky]. Lisbon: Relógio D'Água Editores. Vitruvius. (1914). The ten books on architecture (M. H. Morgan & H. L. Warren, Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press et al. Retrieved (2013.01.01) from Project Guttenberg (2006): www.gutenberg.org/files/20239/20239-h/29239-h.htm. Wærn, R. (2008). Scandinavia: Prefabrication as a Model of Society. In B. Bergdoll, P. Christensen, & R. Broadhurst (Eds.), Home Delivery: Fabricating the Modern Dwelling (pp. 27-31). New York: Museum of Moderrn Art.

300

Waskett, P., & Phillipson, M. (2001). Defining the Sustainability of Prefabrication and Modular Process in Construction DTI Construction Industry Directorate Project Report : Current Practice and Potential Uses of Prefabrication: BRE Scotland. Way, S. (2011). Leing Easi-Form Housing. Retrieved 2014.06.01, from www.collier- stevens.co.uk/surveyors-blog/2011/laing-easi-form-housing/#.U-ISrmPP1VA Weston, R. (2002). Jorn Utzon: Inspiration, Vision, Architecture. Hellerup: Edition Bløndal. Whyte, I. B. (1985). The Crystal Chain letters : Architectural fantasies by Bruno Taut and his circle. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Wiencek, H. (1987). The world of LEGO toys. New York: H.N. Abrams. Wilson, R. J. (1996). Introduction to graph theory (4th ed. ed.). Harlow: Longman. Wilson, W. (1998). The Finnish Wood House - Yesterday Today Tomorrow. (Master), University of Washington, Seattle. Retrieved from www.habiter- autrement.org/11.construction/contributions-11/The-Finnish-Wood-House.pdf Wittgenstein, L. (1995). Tratado Lógico-Filosófico - Investigações filosóficas (M. S. Lourenço & T. d. Oliveira, Trans. 2ª ed.). Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian. Wittkower, R. (1995). Los Fundamentos de la Arquitectura en la Edad Del Humanismo: Grupo Anaya Comercial. Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (2003). Lean thinking : banish waste and create wealth in your corporation ([Rev. ed.] ed.). New York: Free Press ; London : Simon & Schuster. Woudhuysen, J., & Abley, I. (2004). Why is construction so backward? Chichester ; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley- Academy. Wright, F. L., & Pfeiffer, B. B. (1992). Frank Lloyd Wright Collected Writings. New York, Scottsdale, AZ: Rizzoli, Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. Yarnal, B., & Aman, D. (2009). An Examination of Mobile Homes in Rural Pennsylvania. Harrisburg, PA: The Center for Integrated Regional Assessment at Pennsylvania State University. Young, D., & Young, M. (2007). The Art of Japanese Architecture: Tuttle Publishing. Zipkin, P. (2001). The Limits of Mass Customization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 42(3), 81-87.

301

302

Table of Acronyms

AHP Affordable Houses Project AIROH Aircraft Industries Research Organisation on Housing BIM Building Information Modelling BISF British Iron and Steel Federation BOM Bill of Materials CAD Computer-Aided Design CAM Computer-Aided Manufacturing CEO Chief Executive Officer CFS Cold-Formed Steel CIAM Congrès Internationaux d'Architecture Moderne CLASP Consortium of Local Authorities Special Programme CNC Computer Numerical Control DC District Capital DEWOG Deutsche Wohnungsfürsorgung Aktiengesellschaft für Beamte, Angestellete und Arbeiter [“Shareholder German Company for the Improvement of Housing for Civil Servants, Employees and Workers”] DSME Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering DTI Department of Trade and Industry EPSRC Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EU European Union GDP Gross Domestic Product GDR German Democratic Republic, or East Germany GEHAG Gemeinnützige Heimstätten-, Spar- und Bau-Aktiengesellschaft [“Housing Cooperative for Savings and Construction”] HHI Hyundai Heavy Industries HUD Housing and Urban Development HVAC Heat Ventilation and Air Conditioning ICAT International Congress for Architecture and Town-Planning IFD Industrial, Flexible and Demountable IG Independent Group IMF International Monetary Fund ISISE Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering ISNSC International Scientific Networks in Steel Construction ISO International Organization for Standardization

303

IT’s Information Technologies LCE life-cycle end LED Light-Emitting Diode LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LPS Large-Panel concrete Systems LT Lean Thinking MARS Modern Architectural Research Group MBOM Manufacturing Bill of Materials MC Mass-Customization MHI Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology MP Mass-Production NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NYC New York City OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer OPP Order Penetration Point OSB Oriented Stranded Board OSM Off-Site Manufacturing PE Polyethylene R&D Research & Development RIBA Royal Institute of British Architects SAR Foundation for Architects Research SFC Strategic Forum for Construction SFHC Steel Frame House Company TPS Toyota Production System / Temporary Housing Programme TV Television UC University of Coimbra UFO Unidentified Flying Object UK United Kingdom UN United Nations USA United States of America USSR Soviet Union VEHA Veteran Emergency Housing Act WBSC Walter Bates Steel Corporation ( WWI World War I WWII World War II

304

Table of Figures

Figure 1. Utzon’s Kingo houses (a), Eyck’s Orphanage (b) and Safdie’s Habitat’67 (c). ______29 Figure 2. Signifier and signified. ______49 Figure 3. From Myth to form. ______55 Figure 4. Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. ______144 Figure 5. Customization vs standardization. ______148 Figure 6. Modularity. ______154 Figure 7. Types of modular architecture. ______155 Figure 8. Module. ______156 Figure 9. Example of a functional mapping of a window, from function set to a component mapping. ______157 Figure 10. Interfaces in a graph representation. ______158 Figure 11. Example of a light switch modularity. ______158 Figure 12. Unlike in a decoupled interface (b), in a coupled interface (a) a change in A implies a change in B and vice-versa. ______159 Figure 13. Graph fundamentals. ______161 Figure 14. Graph representation of a hypothetical product decomposition and isolated observation of two of its sub-components. __ 162 Figure 15. The module window example-case. ______164 Figure 16. A graph representation of two different levels of functional components of a window. ______164 Figure 17. A simple case of modular application. ______172 Figure 18. A one-dimensional generalization of form processes: (a) continuous (kin), i.e. dividing the length l sequentially, starting in one; (b,c,d) discontinuous (discrete), assembling segments given by s(i) to form length l, in (b) i goes from 1 to n, in (c) a case of arrangements of (b), and in (d) with i always equal to 1. ______173 Figure 19. Example of initial section constraints. ______183 Figure 20. Grid (a) and combinations (b). ______184 Figure 21. Illustration of variations on the case of level 0 (0-1.1). ______184 Figure 22. Illustration of level -1 variations according to terrain adaptation scenarios. ______185 Figure 23. Illustration of urban adaptation scenarios (a, b, c, d), example case (e), and developed cases (f, g). ______185 Figure 24. Illustration of an urban ensemble in detached scenarios, and showing different overhangs hypothesis. ______186 Figure 25. Illustrative design case. ______187 Figure 26. Illustration of a virtually limitless expansion (no added constraints) of m:(2, 3) derived shapes. ______189 Figure 27. Initial m:(2, 3) derived shapes (a) and their essential members (b). ______190 Figure 28. Arrangements in (a) m:(4, 2) and (b) m:(3, 3) (left, in black), and some of their possible bi-part subdivisions using elements from a m:(2, 3) (right, in white). ______190 Figure 29. Illustrating a matrix formalism through the description of a L-shape, and unfolding to topological and typological values, where in (d) are added connections to establish a topological path, and in (e) topology is labeled with typological values via a set of externally given base program rules. The subscript notation for m—in (d) and (e)— follows the conventional matrix notation, where in the comma separated values the first indicates row and the second the column position in the matrix. ______191

305

Figure 30. Illustration of a modular shape definition via connectedness, in which in each case a discrete shape is defined by a continuous color in a given modular rank. In (e), the expression is-1 stands for a modularly incremented distance (i) of a s-1 scope, which is thus analogous with connectedness features in (f). In the AHP, the is-1 would be a modular denominator, corresponding to a dimension of the modular unit u of 0,60×0,60m. ______192 Figure 31. Notation application examples in a s:(2, 3) grid (a, b, c, and d) and in an expanded s+1:(2, 7) grid. ______193 Figure 32. Illustration of a R (rotation) and T (translation) operations. In (a) R uses a simplified θe formalism, describing a unit vector e (indicating the direction of an axis of rotation) and an angle θ (describing the magnitude of the rotation about the axis) to be applied in the relative origin os of a shape. In (b) is shown T as a special case of R. ______194

Figure 33. Illustration of a simultaneous use of R, T and A (array) operators to form a triangle-based grid (g) and a triangle-based shape (sg). _ 194 Figure 34. Two examples of addressing modules’ interface, with application of threshold offset criteria, including some possible variations. __ 196 Figure 35. Modular dependency reduction and improved symmetry in relation to the initial AHP design. ______196

Figure 36. Examples of (a) endogenous adaptability with typological variations from two symmetrical [11:321] shapes, and (b) exogenous adaptability from a [11:321] base shape. ______196 Figure 37. Example of four possible minimum shapes—(a)•(b), (a)•(c), (a)•(d), and (a)•(e)—over two levels, using the two different orientations, m:(2, 1) and m:(1, 2) given by the module’s asymmetry by the u:(7, 8). ______199 Figure 38. Illustration of all of the different combinations within a m:(2,3), in which shapes have the same total number of modules in each case, considering both levels—except (f), for comparison purposes. In (a), (b) and (c) are represented the two-shape cases, and in (d) and (e) the three-shape cases. ______200 Figure 39. Examples of other formal possibilities using the 1-2 as core principle. ______200 Figure 40. Increased symmetry by using u:(8, 8) modules. ______201 Figure 41. Detailed example of the increased symmetry implications. ______202 Figure 42. Illustration of what future developments may look like, using smaller modules as modular compounding base for more intricate and varied outputs. ______203 Figure 43. Maximum occupation cases of simple junctions in a double dwelling scenario (dwelling a and b) of m:(2, 3) shapes under different urban constraints: (a) detached, (b) semi-detached and/or semi-attached and (c) attached—d0, d1 and d2 correspond to the number of walls with possible direct contact with exterior, dashed lines represent unfeasible modules and thick lines the dn walls. Without loss of generalization, in this case we illustrate only examples with equal areas, and thus with symmetrical shapes. Numbers (1), (2) and (3) depart from the same base illustrated in the (a) respective cases. In (c), numbers (4) and (5) are illustrate the ways out of the d induced constraints with a void central module. In thick lines are eventual façades with d and in dashed line are impossibilities due to d constraints. ____ 205 Figure 44. Linear limits given d constraints. ______206 Figure 45. Expressions for assessment of different grid scenarios. ______207 Figure 46. Illustration of a basic case of multi-story adaptation, where it was necessary to add an exception to the m:(2,3) shapes in level 0. ___ 208 Figure 47. Unwrapping minimum circulation area in (a), (b) and (c), and circulation schematics in (d) and (e). ______208 Figure 48. Minimum circulation in the enhanced AHP shapes. ______209 Figure 49. Percentages relation of the minimum circulation areas depicted in Figure 48. ______209 Figure 50. Algorithm development flowchart. ______211 Figure 51. Algorithm structure to generate a random primary functional allocation from a given brief, for a generic case of a single level typology of an m:(2, 3) scope. ______213 Figure 52. Algorithm structure for conversion of functional allocation into topological relations for a simple case of a single level typology. __ 214 Figure 53. Example of derivation the set of rules for allocation (a) and topology (b), for a case given a O, K, B, B, L, D brief input. __ 214 Figure 54. Multi-story diagrams. ______217 Figure 55. External gallery solution diagram. ______217 Figure 56. Detailed gallery solution. ______218 Figure 57. Prototype construction, (a,d) ground floor structure, (b,c) infrastructure through structure, (e) vapor barrier, (f) exhaustion through structure, (g,i,j) stairs, (h) first floor structure (k) OSB over structure, (m) finishing external layer (l,n) concluded raw elements. ______222 Figure 58. Robot manufacturing modular panels. Robot #1: (a) loading substructure; (b) deploying substructure to place; (c) loading board; (d), (e) deploying board. Robot #2: (f) fastening board to substructure.______227 Figure 59. Finalized prototype. ______229

306

Table of Tables

Table 1. Level of ex-situ work per type of building, adapted from Bock (2006). ______121 Table 2. Sum of Top 10 Companies by industry in 2014, based on Forbes Global 2000 list. ______128 Table 3. A selection of output vectors. ______141 Table 4. OPP postponement strategies. ______145 Table 5. A selection of factors with potential greater impact in the architectural production. ______149 Table 6. Differences in product development according to architectural approach, based on K. Ulrich (1995). ______171 Table 7. AHP main topics. ______177 Table 8. Shape notation. ______193 Table 9. Possible arrangements of numbers of modules (base arrangements) in a m:(2,3), excluding the non-viable both extremes, the 6-6 and the 1-1 case. In each case left and right-hand sides of the hyphen separator are swappable without loss of generalization. ______200 Table 10. Functional labelling, to note that, given its specificity and range of different sizes (from full module to half module) K is here considered both for primary and secondary allocation. ______211 Table 11. Primary design brief assignment rules. ______212 Table 12. Primary housing program for a simple one level house, given Table 11 rules and a m:(2, 3) grid. ______212

307

308

References

1 Cf. McLuhan (1962). title of his famous book Architecture, dead lan- which different transmutations and deriva- guage. tions can be made within the “mother and re- 2 Translated as this will kill that. In Notre ceptacle of all created and visible and in any way sen- Dame de Paris, Victor Hugo shows a priest 7 Cf. Meadows, Randers, and Meadows sible things, (…) an invisible and formless being pointing first to a book, then to the Paris ca- (2004). which receives all things” (Plato, 1998). Aristotle thedral, and saying ceci tuera cela. 8 Foucault, M. (1970) The Order of Things: (b.384BC-d.322BC) took this idea further, 3 Article originally published under the ti- An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New regarding space as ‘determined’ by the mo- tle Alles ist Architektur [“Everything is Architec- York: Random House, p.332. tions of bodies, and thus, causally linking ture”], in Bau, 112 (1968: 2). Revised in Eng- space, matter and time. The existence of a lish in the catalogue Hollein. (cf. Ockman & 9 Interview to Maria Leonor Nunes in Jor- void would be impossible, since a void nal de Letras. No. 1128; December 25, 2013, Eigen, 1993: 460-462). would not have properties of direction or to January 7, 2014. Portugal, p.11. change of motion, so there would be no 4 Grassi (2003: 31). such thing as empty space. Furthermore, no 10 Calvino, I. (1974) Invisible cities. New space, time or matter and their motions 5 Architecture’s forms are ought to arise York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, p. 82. could be conceivable without a mind to ac- from a thorough analytical process where 11 Empirically, space-time can be related count them. To Aristotle, space and time are things follow successive filters, depurating until they find their right place, that is, “per- to the notion of place, but also to motion or interdependent and not definable by them- matter, or to the idea of extension or of ge- selves but in relation to other parameters: fect, without leaving behind anything that will not ometry, as well as to notions of perception, time as change of motion, and space as remove itself” (Grassi, 2003: 32). Grassi (2003: 28) writes “This is the singular condition of the experience, inner or mental construction, or change of place; time as the interval between of phenomena. It can also be related to cul- two events, and space as distance between work in architecture: a work where constraints are ture, art, symbolization, and different per- two points. He describes space as what it is actually elements of individualization of form, a work in which the overcoming of the practical diffi- spectives or modes of representation, or defined as the limit of the surrounding body even to human practices such as politics, ge- towards what is surrounded. The idea of culties and the definition of form are the same thing. ography, or colonization, and its different change seems related to a mind to record This is also the beauty of this work: the safety of a work that is exclusively dedicated to its own object uses—aesthetic, architectural, military, eco- that change: if the universe was immutable, nomic, politic, and so on—corresponding to there would be no time; if time is the meas- and that only in this object meets the conditions to strategic and/or ideological relations. uring or counting of motion, it is only con- move forward. A work in which form is always met at the end, after going through many trials: overcom- ceivable with the existence of a counting 12 Early on, in the classical period, the mind; if there were no mind to count, there ing obstacles, surrounding them, following unex- western thinking has given relevance to the could be no time (cf. IEP, 2005). pected paths, adapting, gradually eliminating all that concept of space. The atomists, such as is superfluous, refining itself, we see the growth of its In the modern era, a revolution in the Democritus (b.460BC-d.370BC), regarded understanding of space took place with Ni- condition of need, acquiring thickness and experi- space as an infinite void extension on which colaus Copernicus’ (b.1473-d.1543) helio- ence; and no one, except the foolish or those acting in the basic indivisible bodies (the atoms, from bad faith, can never say that such final form is thus centric model, placing the Sun, instead of which everything else was composed) were the Earth, in the center of the Universe. The determined by a specific formal will. Furthermore, moving. Plato (b.427BC-d.327BC), in the Ti- debate would be pursued by notable figures the form is the only the result of this long process, its maeus, would share a similar vision, but he only witness; the liberated form, the form never such as Galileo Galilei (b.1564-d.1642), Jo- would add an implicit correlation with mat- hannes Kepler (b.1571-d.1630) or Isaac sought. Not the stupid spontaneous form that does ter (or the four elements as he stated). To Newton (b.1642-d.1727). With René Des- not exist, not least the natural formal that does not Plato, space is the receptacle in which all be- exist as we well know, but the built form, the tem- cartes’s (b.1596-d.1650) arguments, the coming takes place. In the absence of things, whole essence of a body is understood as its perate form, the form that is only intended under space would exist anyhow, but as an empty, geometrically definable extension—space, these conditions” (free translation). boundless receptacle. Each of the four ele- and hence the Universe, would be indefi- 6 Grassi (cf. 2003) himself recognized it, ments, Earth, Air, Fire, and Water, would nitely extended. This idea was not entirely have a geometric correspondence, from as utterly shown through a quite expressive

309

to the point of seemingly infinity, and where 16 Newton’s theory proved spot-on for subscribed by Newton, who believed in perception locates its objects and its move- practical purposes. However, as Ernst Mach space as an entity independent of ordinary ments, and in this sense, the different parts (b.1838-d.1916) would subsequently point material objects, and such also contrasted of space-time benefit of a mutual exteriority. out, it was short in advancing a causality be- with the Aristotelian view of a spherical fir- In this perspective, it is by the relations, on tween the apple that falls (i.e. gravity) and mament of fixed stars. These and other ideas how different elements of this mutual exte- the movement it appears to make (i.e. space- brought about in the Enlightenment age riority articulate, that space-time becomes. time). It would not take long for criticism to have laid out a new cosmology, posing cen- Linguistically, such can be illustrated by the Newton’s ideas to appear. In his Science of Me- tral questions, and causing great convul- dialectics of absolute and relative, mental chanics, first published in 1883, the Austrian sions, as Galileo famously experienced in and sensible, image and real, or even the physicist and philosopher Ernst Mach first hand with his religious inquisitors. As mechanistic 0 and 1, and so forth. (cf. would firmly criticize Newton’s ideas, reject- Kant would put it, (rational) Man was now Saussure, 1959 ; cf. Silverman, 2012). Thus, ing the unilateral causality and the absolute the center of all conceptual and empirical ex- acknowledging an Entity from a confronta- concepts that had been cornerstones of sci- perience, overcoming not only the mystic- tion with an Other, towards and existence— ence since the Enlightenment (cf. Mach, religious, yet fundamentally the rationalist- Dasein—and through it enabling not only 1919: 222-255). Newton assumed that even empiricist deadlock, typical of the XVII and their come into being, but also the come into relative measurements are possible to be ref- XVIII centuries. With it, a new anthropo- being of additional entities that were not im- erenced to an absolute system, and that had centric universalism was also being stated plied in an initially perceived space. influenced Kant’s philosophical concep- (cf. Markie, 2015). In a different perspective, the evolution tions. However, unlike Newton, to Mach all 13 Nonetheless, the Cartesian outset of geometries has implied that, in fact, space referential systems and all movements are would begin to be philosophically ques- can in a way be cultural, since the non-Eu- relative. Relativity was certainly not a new tioned soon after Descartes. Leibniz would clidian systems have configured spaces idea, as the notion had been known and ac- introduce the notion that space is of the or- where the common perceptual notions are cepted for centuries, but not on those terms. der of the ideal essences and is made only by put in check. This is a concept which that Mach’s ideas eventually attracted a younger relations and co-presence of things. In the has been remarkably depicted in Edwin Ab- generation of researchers of around 1900, end of the XVII century, half a century after bot’s (b.1838–d.1926) prophetic novel Flat- among which Albert Einstein (b.1879– Descartes, Leibniz was already philosophi- land: A Romance of Many Dimensions (1884), d.1955) was included. cally rejecting the Cartesian derived notion where the dimensional is put alongside the From Einstein’s, each system is auton- of space as a purely mathematical extension, cultural, showing the extreme difficulty of omous and is ruled by its specific, local laws, as this notion would not allow “the under- corporeally imagining one’s own existence in but it also shares a mutual connection, where standing of the interpenetrability and reciprocal ‘ac- more or less dimensions. local laws are fundamentally variants of uni- tion of the bodies’, their movement, force and willing- versal laws—duration and size relate to ve- 14 Cf. Descartes (1637) appraisal of the ness to change” (Delius, 2001: 47-52). locity; distance becomes equivalent to time; Kant would see it as an aprioristic form method as the only path to unveil the secrets of mass to energy; gravitation to acceleration, of sensibility, which cannot be deducted nature. and so forth. With it, philosophically is no from experience or reduced to a concept— 15 In Newton’s model, space and time longer conceivable an isotropic void in the on the contrary, it was space that made ex- were a background on which events would sense of the Newtonian space, nor a uni- perience possible. Kavanaugh (2007: 6) unfold, but which were not affected by form system of coordinates in the sense of writes: “Space and time, for Kant, are pure onto- them. This vision was still deeply rooted in Descartes’ extension. Yet, there is the con- logical categories that provide the Grund, “founda- the platonic conception of space, in which ception of a complex, irregular space-time tion”, or the condition of the possibility of experience. time was considered eternal, in the sense flow, varying with the concentration, distri- Indeed, for Kant, space and time, as the only pure that it had always existed and would always bution and relative movement of material form of intuition, are of paramount importance in exist. Time was viewed as an infinite line, in- bodies. Matter, or the equivalent energy, de- his architectonic. Kant emphatically states: “The dependent of whatever is happening in the termines the structure of the space-time only intuition that is given apriori is that of the pure Universe (cf. Hawking, 2001: 29-65). For from place to place in a four-dimensional ge- form of appearances (phenomena) – space and time”. Newton, there was an absolute space, iso- ometry of variable curvature (cf. Huggett & (…) Space and time are not themselves phenomena, tropic and immobile, extended into infinity Hoefer, 2015). but the form of intuition; things that are given in in three dimensions, and an absolute, linear The relational notion of space-time also space and time, on the other hand, are aposteriori in time. Relativity in space, time or motion was definitely bonds gravity with a space-time that they are represented in perception. Space and conceived only insofar it as a part of an ab- continuum—gravitational fields cause warps time are the only apriori intuitions. Simply stated, solute referential. Newton writes, “relative, in space-time, thus weaving gravity into the these intuitions, without which no object could be per- apparent, and common time, is some sensible and continuum. The effect would be validated ceived in space and time, are merely the representa- external measure of absolute time (duration), esti- during the 1919 solar eclipse, in which the tions of phenomena to ourselves”. Such Kantian mated by the motions of bodies, whether accurate or curvature of light due to gravitational influ- space also seems to correspond to a com- inequable, and is commonly employed in place of true ence could for the first time be accurately mon perceptual notion, a space that is the time; as an hour, a day, a month, a year. (...) All measured, and found to be in agreement philosophical transposition of the Euclidian motions can be accelerated and retarded. But the flow with Einstein’s general relativity predictions. geometric space—continuous, isotropic, ho- of absolute time cannot be changed. (…) Absolute From the curved notions, space-time is bent, mogeneous and tridimensional, and made by space, in its own nature and without regard to any- and thus, in a sense, both space and time abstraction from a perceived space. thing external, always remains similar and immov- have a form, even if we do not perceptually Phenomenologically, space-time can be able. Relative space is some movable dimension or experience it, or have a hard time to imagine understood as a property of exteriority in re- measure of absolute space, which our senses determine it. lation to though, or the thought of self, or simply by its position with respect to other bodies, and which the self, as existentialists would put it. A com- is commonly taken for immovable [absolute] space” mon idea is to define it as a boundless me- (cf. Mach, 1919: 222-226). dium, which contains every finite extension,

310

seven recurved dimensions (those attributed ture it is likely we realize that in many cases archi- 17 The book is one of the major to under- to properties such as mass, electrical charge, tecture is allergic to time, because architects keep be- stand modernism in architecture, a move- and so on), which would explain the charac- ing asked to build lasting monuments, frozen in ment that arguably embodies what is the teristics of the fundamental forces in nature. time. But buildings have no such presumption, build- greatest change of paradigm in the profes- A different theory, the bosonic string theory, ings live in time, the same way we do. As in time we sion occurring in the past centuries, insofar predicts up to twenty-six dimensions. Other learn, and in time buildings learn” (cf. Brand, as it marks a shift towards architecture’s de- possibility, called the world of brana theory, 1995). finitive embrace of the ethos of an industri- is that we are stuck in a subspace with 3+1 25 Cosmos, which is also an allegory to the alized world. In the least, the proof of the dimensions, where the ‘3+1’ is a reminder book’s impact can be measured by the nu- that time is a different kind of spatial dimen- ideal, desired, aspirational, mythical and never-ending source of knowledge, and merous written sources on it. Moreover, its sion. In other words, we would be living in hence as of abstract, mental-derived con- impact can for instance be noted by its sub- a universe inside another. In both cases, sequent protagonism in Manfredo Tafuri’s gravity plays a role in the occult dimensions struct. Earth, which is also an allegory for gravity, to keep the feet in the ground, for the formulation of operative criticism, which, as it producing the other non-gravitational forces palpable, tangible, for what is connecting to is well-known, has been foremost a critique such as electromagnetism (cf. Hawking, everyday life, the mundane and ordinary. In on a modernist ideological or even dogmatic 2001). approach to historical facts that conceals an analysis to Vitruvius’s Ten Books on Archi- their inherent complexities and contradic- 22 Arnheim (cf. 2009: 9-32) refers that to tecture, Dripps (1997: 14-16) writes: “the skies tions. the platonic idea of space as a void to be now become the starry firmament, a symbolic con- The modernism in architecture is cer- filled lacks the knowledge of modern phys- struct that allows inquisitive humans to consider tainly not just about the arguments ex- ics as well as the modes in which its percep- their own position within it. It is the knowledge pressed in Giedion’s book. Notwithstand- tion psychologically occurs. gained from this act of orientation that provides stability for the foundation of human settlement. (…) ing, its expressive title makes a case that far 23 On its classic visual dictionary, Ching In order for the idea of the starry firmament to re- extends the profession, winking to the tech- (cf. 2007) illustrates with great depth some nical trends of the epoch, and endorsed main vital it must be the subject to the fresh specula- fundamental design considerations on how tive gaze of each upright person. In this way its par- through a modern space and time perspec- space can vary in form, organization, pro- adigmatic structure is repeatedly reinvented out of tive. As to the content, in the least it has the portion, scale, etc., and how principles such merit of relating modern architecture and circumstances of each individual life. This process of as symmetry, hierarchy or rhythm may be reinvention also insures that the world will have par- urban planning with the historical and cul- applied, representing “the basic elements, sys- ticular meaning for each individual. (…) As the tural context of its epoch, namely the com- tems, and orders that constitute a physical work of pliant aspects of the industrial era, looking word ‘firmament’ convey, the vault or the arch of the architecture”. Its eloquent and seductive visual heavens (…) possesses the orderly and systematic into similarities between architecture and ar- approach reminds us of the need to have structure of the cosmos. Moreover, this structure has eas as diverse as urban planning, arts or en- some sort of representation, of coded sys- gineering—force-vectors in a thus implied its counterpart in the orderly system that underlies tem, that can readily be communicated and the building of the first dwelling. The upright figure space and time conformation of a modern understood, and which is deeply attached to is an important part of this orderly system, in which machine-age. the referential sense of a coordinated tridi- all of these imputed structures originate”. Giedion (2004: 465) writes: “(it) became mensional system. And its visual approach is mostly clear that the aesthetical qualities of space, for also a reminder that no matter how coded 26 In a clear allusion to the dangers of con- the eye, were not limited to its own infinity, as are an this system may be, there is a haptic sense – sidering definitive, aprioristic, notions of example the gardens of Versailles”. The naturalist which he purposefully sustains by presenting space, Lefebvre (2005: 209) writes: “Function idea of an absolutely definable, bounded us hand-made, rigorous but sketch-like, calls for something other, something more, something space made no sense anymore, exploding in drawings – that needs to be preserved to em- better than functionality alone”. seemingly infinite possibilities of relations— power a greater empathy with a certain rep- Giedion (2004: 465) proceeds with: “as to ap- resentation of reality or the proto-realities 27 For this is still valid the image of the Vi- truvian upright figure, as described in 1-3, prehend the true nature of space, the observer must which are so remarkably present in architec- Chapter I, of Book II: “The men of old were born project himself through it. The staircases of the supe- ture conception. rior floors of the Eiffel Tower are amidst the first like wild beasts, in woods, caves, and groves, and architectural expressions of continuous interpenetra- 24 Brand (cf. 1995) writes on the im- lived on savage fare. (By finding and controlling fire), tion of internal and external space”. Alongside portance of acknowledging that buildings keeping it alive, (they) brought up other people to it, the relativity path, there was also an arising have a life of their own, reflecting on how showing them by signs how much comfort they got need to explore the forms that the industrial architects often neglect this foremost aspect from it. In that gathering of men, at a time when and technological development was bring- of buildings. It is an implicit critic to mod- utterance of sound was purely individual, from daily ing—Giedion’s (cf. 2004) notes on Iron Ar- ernist innovators like Buckminster Fuller, habits they fixed upon articulate words just as these chitecture is a historic and critical architectural whose dome buildings were difficult to happened to come; then, from indicating by name reference in this respect. adapt or extend, or Frank O’Gehry for things in common use, the result was that in this buildings extremely difficult to maintain, Le chance way they began to talk, and thus originated 18 Tafuri (1976: xi). Corbusier for buildings with little considera- conversation with one another. (…) It was the dis- 19 Cf. Utzon and Weston (2009). tion for the desires and needs of families, or covery of fire that originally gave rise to the coming Frank Lloyd Wright for not really caring if together of men, to the deliberative assembly, and to 20 Cf. Valena, Avermaete, and Vrachliotis his buildings leaked or not. “Finally completing social intercourse. And so, as they kept coming to- (2011). a new building seems such a glorious culmination. gether in greater numbers into one place, finding But it is an illusion. A building is not something you themselves naturally gifted beyond the other animals 21 For instance, the current mathematical finish; a building is something you start. (…) If we in not being obliged to walk with faces to the ground, principles used in the string theory, allows get more interested in buildings than with architec- but upright, and gazing upon the splendor of the physics theorists to predict that our universe has eleven dimensions: three spatial (height, length, width), one temporal (time) and

311

to official clients and the public at large”. been laid down by qualified technical specialists. starry firmament, and also in being able to do with (…) 32 Walter Gropius, in his intervention en- ease whatever they chose with their hands and fingers, 75 On both spiritual and material planes, the they began in that first assembly to construct shelters. titled Sociological Premises for the Minimum city must ensure individual liberty and the ad- Dwelling of Urban Industrial Populations, in the (…) Next, by observing the shelters of others and vantages of collective action. (…) 1929 congress, illustrates the reality within adding new details to their own inceptions, they con- 76 The dimensions of all elements within the ur- structed better and better kinds of huts as time went the metaphor: “The invention of the machine ban system can only be governed by human proportions. leads to the socialization of labor. Goods are no on. (…) And since they were of an imitative and (…) longer produced for one’s own needs but for the pur- teachable nature, they would daily point out to each 77 The keys to urbanism are to be found in the other the results of their building, boasting of the nov- pose of exchange within the society… With the pro- four functions: inhabiting, working, recreation (in gressive emergence of the individual the human birth elties in it; and thus, with their natural gifts sharp- leisure time), and circulation. (…) rate decreases… The individual’s mobility increases ened by emulation, their standards improved daily” 78 Plans will determine the structure of each of (Vitruvius, 1914: 38-39). with the increasing transportation facilities, and the the sectors allocated to the four key functions and they family is thereby diffused and diminished” Standing by the fire, people were re- will also determine their respective locations within the (Aymonino, 1976: 115-116). quired to communicate in a way they did not whole. (…) need when they were by themselves. This 33 The XVIIth and XIXth century Imperi- 79 The cycle of daily functions-inhabiting, metaphor of the gathering of people repre- alism had left an important legacy, by means working, recreation (recuperation)-will be regulated sents what ultimately led to the establish- of its portrayal of cultures or natural aspects by urbanism with the strictest emphasis on time sav- ment of protocols to communicate – the of its remote places, as manifested by the ing, the dwelling being regarded as the very center of birth of language and so forth. This initiating works of Charles Darwin or Lewis Henry urbanistic concern and the focal point for every meas- knowledge of fire as of the ‘other’ (which is Morgan. ure of distance. (…) similar but different from ‘I’) by language or 80 The new mechanical speeds have thrown the other means of communication, as of the 34 Mumford (2000: 9) writes: “After La urban milieu into confusion, introducing constant way of building, and mostly how these kinds Sarraz, the tireless publicizing of modern architec- danger, causing traffic congestion and paralyzing of wisdom evolve and consolidate in time is ture and the name of CIAM by Le Corbusier, communications, and jeopardizing hygiene. (…) fundamental to understand how the notion Giedion, and other members gave the event a mythic 81 The principle of urban and suburban traffic of dwelling evolved and, with it, how archi- quality, often remembered as the point where various must be revised. A classification of available speeds tecture came into being (cf. Dripps, 1997: 7). avant-garde movements coalesced into what came to must be devised. Zoning reforms bringing the key be known as the ‘Modern Movement’. More recently, functions of the city into harmony will create natural 28 In the broader concept of home, a myr- this interpretation has been challenged by historians links between them, in support of which a rational iad of popular sayings have it implied, e.g., who see the early history of CIAM as a series of network of major traffic arteries will be planned. there is no place like home or home is where the heart disconnected episodes, with shifting participants (…) is, a common wisdom built of many layers. whose positions were not always clearly defined, and 82 Urbanism is a three-dimensional, not a Whereas planet Earth can be regarded as hu- whose goals were often in conflict. While this view two-dimensional, science. Introducing the element of manity’s home, the dwelling is the material ex- provides a necessary counterbalance to the overstated height will solve the problems of modern traffic and pression of the personal, familiar home. It is claims of unity by CIAM's members, the formation leisure by utilizing the open spaces thus created. (…) again the Vitruvian sense of domestic life as of CIAM does appear to be a defining moment in 83 The city must be studied within the whole of a cell (or image-cell), of a larger social, cul- the formation of a new approach to architecture”. its region of influence. A regional plan will replace the tural or political life of a community. simple municipal plan. The limit of the agglomeration 35 Cf. Le Corbusier (1973: 6-8). 29 Cf. Kostof (1986). will be expressed in terms of the radius of its economic 36 Aymonino (1976: 127). action. (…) 30 Cf. Le Corbusier (1986). 84 Once the city is defined as a functional unit, 37 Cf. Aymonino (1976: 126-138, 233- it should grow harmoniously in each of its parts, hav- 31 Mumford (2000: 9-10) writes: “CIAM’s 243). initial direction was shaped by the interaction of Le ing at hand the spaces and intercommunications Corbusier and other mostly French-speaking propo- 38 Cf. Le Corbusier (1973). within which the stages of its development may be nents of a new architecture with the mostly German- inscribed with equilibrium. (…) 39 The conclusions of the charter are speaking representatives of a leftist and technocratic 85 It is a matter of the most urgent necessity summed up in the following: approach to architecture and social organization. In that every city draw up its program and enact the “71 The majority of the cities studied (by the the changed social and political conditions in Europe laws that will enable it to be carried out. (…) Fourth Congress) today present the very image of after the First World War, the limited prewar efforts 86 The program must be based on rigorous chaos: they do not at all fulfill their purpose, which to make a more socially responsive architecture took analyses carried out by specialists. It must provide is to satisfy the primordial biological and psychologi- a new and decisive turn. Shortly after the La Sarraz for its stages in time and in space. It must bring to- cal needs of their populations. (…) ‘preparatory congress’: Giedion, the newly appointed gether in fruitful harmony the natural resources of the 72 This situation reveals the incessant accre- CIAM secretary, wrote to the Dutch architect and site, the overall topography, the economic facts, the tion of private interests ever since the beginning of the town planner Cornelis van Eesteren (1897-1988) sociological demands, and the spiritual values. (…) machinist age. (…) that the goals of CIAM were: 87 For the architect occupied with the tasks of 73 The ruthless violence of private interests pro- a) To formulate the contemporary program of urbanism, the measuring rod will be the human vokes a disastrous upset in the balance between the architecture. scale. (…) thrust of economic forces on the one hand and the b) To advocate the idea of modern architecture. 88 The initial nucleus of urbanism is a cell for weakness of administrative control and the power- c) To forcefully introduce this idea into tech- living – a dwelling – and its insertion into a group lessness of social solidarity on the other. (…) nical, economic and social circles. forming a habitation unit of efficient size. (…) 74 Although the cities are in a state of contin- d) To see to the resolution of architectural prob- 89 With this dwelling unit as the starting uous transformation, their development is conducted lems. point, relationships within the urban space will be without precision or control, and in utter disregard of Insofar as a common agenda can be said to have established between habitation, work places, and the the principles of contemporary urbanism which have existed, CIAM was intended both to define the basis of the new architecture and to vigorously promote it

312

CIAM 11 (1959 – Otterlo, The Nether- or creation of public deposits of construc- facilities set aside for leisure. (…) lands), with organized dissolution of CIAM tion materials. In the second period, until 90 To accomplish this great task, it is essential by Team 10. 1923, the measures were mainly based on to utilize the resources of modern techniques, which, funding grants and the concession of mort- 42 Cf. Giedion (2004). through the collaboration of specialists, will support gages at very low interest. As Heynen (1999: 40-41) writes: “in the art of building with all the dependability that sci- However, a rampant inflation would ence can provide, and enrich it with the inventions Space, Time and Architecture Giedion (builds) nullify the effectiveness of the estimated up a case for the thesis that modern architecture, as and resources of the age. (…) funding forms. The problem only begins to a legitimate heir to the most relevant architectural 91 The course of events will be profoundly in- be solved with the currency stabilization and fluenced by political, social, and economic factors... trends of the past, is capable of contributing to bridg- attraction of foreign investment. The oppor- ing the gap between thought and feeling because it (…) tunities offered by the reactivation of the relies upon the concept of space-time, just as the sci- 92 and it is not as a last resort that architecture construction and financing mechanisms will intervene. (…) ences and the arts do. The whole aim of Space, Time contributed to consolidate the cooperative and Architecture was thus to canonize modern ar- 93 There are two opposing realities: the scale of societies, which, during these years, would chitecture as a ‘new tradition’. Space, Time and the projects to be undertaken urgently for the reor- do most of the residential interventions ganization of the cities, and the infinitely fragmented Architecture is not a pioneering text in the strict through public housing subsidies. sense of the word: the book does not break new state of land ownership. (…) Despite all the efforts, the housing def- ground or announce a completely new paradigm. A 94 The perilous contradiction indicated above icit remained, determined by multiple phe- raises one of the most hazardous questions of our day: number of elements of this paradigm had been nomena of urban migration that ultimately around for some time already: the moral appeal the urgency of regulating the disposal of all usable lead to overcrowding and deterioration of (Morris, Loos); the concept of space-time and its ap- ground by legal means in order to balance the vital the old heritage. Stability in these terms needs of the individual in complete harmony with col- plication in architecture (van Doesburg, Lissitzky); would be kept until 1931, the year that the the relating of new materials and construction tech- lective needs. (…) global economic crisis bursted. From then nologies on the one hand with architectural design on 95 Private interest will be subordinated to the on, there was a sharp drop in new construc- collective interest” the other (Le Corbusier); the fact that architecture tion due to a contraction in demand, as a and city planning influence each other and are mutu- (Le Corbusier, 1973: 93-105). there was a widening gap between rising ally dependent (CIAM texts); the concern with the rents and household incomes. 40 “65 Architectural assets must be protected, organic and the functional (Moholy-Nagy, the Bau- Cf.Klein (1980: 7-14). whether found in isolated buildings or in urban ag- haus). It was Giedion, however, who forged these var- gregations. (…) ious elements of the modern movement into a closely- 45 Cf. Marques (2012: 67-90). 66 They will be protected if they are the expres- knit whole and who gave it a historical legitimiza- sion of a former culture and if they respond to a uni- tion, tracing its roots back to the tradition of baroque 46 Cf. Aymonino (1976: 29-36). versal interest… (…) architecture and to nineteenth century technological 47 Cf. Aymonino (1976: 50-55). 67 and if their preservation does not entail the developments”. sacrifice of keeping people in unhealthy conditions… 48 Aymonino (1976: 75). (…) 43 Cf. Aymonino (1976). 49 Le Corbusier (1967: 143). 68 and if it is possible to remedy their detri- 44 With the WWI (1914-1918), the house mental presence by means of radical measures, such deficit derived from industrialization would 50 Evers and Thoenes (2003: 725). as detouring vital elements of the traffic system or worsen in the city. The construction indus- 51 Cf.Klein (1980). even displacing centers hitherto regarded as immuta- try declined and eventually all activity ble” stopped. After the war, conditions would 52 Aymonino (1976: 120). (Le Corbusier, 1973: 86-88). deteriorate even further due to the precari- 53 Gropius (1955: 99) writes: “To allow for ous economic situation and the growth of 41 The complete list of CIAM meetings, the increasing development of more pronounced indi- their dates, locations and general themes is inflation rate. As a way to mitigate the problem, one of the most consensual proposals viduality of life within the society and the individual’s as follows: justified demand for occasional withdrawal from his was to implement housing controlled by the CIAM 1 (1928 – La Sarraz, Switzer- surroundings, it is necessary, moreover, to establish land), Foundation of CIAM; state. The construction industry ought to be the following ideal minimum requirement: every CIAM 2 (1929 – Frankfurt am Main, adult shall have his own room, small though it may socialized, regulations reviewed, prices of Germany), or The Minimum Dwelling (also be! The basic dwelling implied by these fundamental known as Existenzminimum); construction materials regulated, credit and lease policies defined. Some of the key requirements would then represent the practical min- CIAM 3 (1930 – Brussels, Belgium) on imum which fulfills its purpose and intentions: the points, such as the policy of land use and re- Rational Land Development; standard dwelling. CIAM 4 (1933 – Athens, Greece), on distribution of wealth, came into conflict with the class and power structures, which The same biological considerations which deter- The Functional City; mine the size of the minimum dwelling are also de- remained unchanged, raising substantive is- CIAM 5 (1937 – Paris, France), on terminative in regard to its grouping and incorpora- Dwelling and Recovery; sues in German society and democracy. To what concerns ordinary practices, the actual tion into the city plan. Maximum light, sun and air CIAM 6 (1947 – Bridgewater, Eng- for all dwellings!”. land), on Reconstruction of Cities; management policy was taken over by super- CIAM 7 (1949 – Bergamo, Italy), on Art visors at a municipal and regional level. 54 Klein (1980: 33). and Architecture; The first period, until 1920, was charac- 55 Le Corbusier (1973: 44) writes: “2 Jux- CIAM 8 (1951 – Hoddesdon, England), terized by transitory and urgent provisions, taposed with economic, social, and political values are on the Heart of the City; such as restrictions on luxury buildings, reg- values of a physiological and psychological origin CIAM 9 (1953 – Aix-en-Provence, ulation of prices of construction materials, which are bound up in the human person and which France), on Habitat; attempt to achieve economies of scale CIAM 10 (1956 – Dubrovnik, Yugosla- through mass actions of long-term funding, via), on Habitat;

313

61 Cf. Conrads (1970: 109-114). 72 In an interview, Candilis affirms: “it introduce concerns of both an individual and a col- seemed totally bogus (as was subsequently con- 62 Cf. Grassi (1983). lective order into the discussion. Life flourishes only firmed). By coloring up large surfaces of paper, any- to the extent of accord between the two contradictory 63 Le Corbusier writes an open letter sent one could declare himself an urban planner. We tried principles that govern the human personality: the in- to the CIAM 10 revealing all his sharpness, to explain that all of this had nothing to do with dividual and the collective”(Le Corbusier, 1973: recognizing the inevitability of generational post-war development, that habitat could not be dealt 44)(Le Corbusier, 1973: 44). shifts: “It is those who are forty years old, born with by coloring things in, that kitchen could not be drawn up according to the number of steps and to the 56 Aymonino (1976: 93). around 1916 during wars and revolutions, and those unborn, now twenty-five years old, born around gestures of a housewife; instead, social, cultural and 57 Cf. Klein (1980). 1930 during the preparation for a new war and ethnic particularities had to be taken into account. amidst a profound economic, social, and political cri- So the famous habitat charter never happened— 58 Cf. Teige (2002). sis, who thus find themselves in the heart of the pre- which was a success in and of itself” (Risselada & 59 Teige (in Hays, 1998: 585-615) writes: sent period the only ones capable of feeling actual Van Den Heuvel, 2005: 321). problems, personally, profoundly, the goals to follow, “The error of Le Corbusier’s proposal is the error of 73 The Statement on Habitat explicitly re- the means to reach them, the pathetic urgency of the monumentality (…). It reveals the danger (…) of jected the Chartre d’Athènes: “Urbanism consid- the definition that a palace is a house, a ‘machine for present situation. They are in the know. Their pre- ered and developed in the terms of the Chartre decessors no longer are, they are out, they are no living in’ which is endowed with a certain dignity and d’Athènes tends to produce ‘towns’ in which vital longer subject to the direct impact of the situation” architectonic potential. Le Corbusier sins against human associations are inadequately expressed. To harmony; having formulated such a clear and com- (Frampton, 2007b: 271-272). comprehend these human associations we must con- prehensible notion as the ‘machine for living in’, he 64 Kostof (1995: 747) described the sider every community as a particular total complex. depreciates it by adding vague attributions of dignity, change in terms of tribal ritual: “Team 10 re- In order to make this comprehension possible, we harmony and architectonic potential, through which jected the establishment guise of postwar Modernism, propose to study urbanism as communities of varying he can then embrace all aestheticism and academi- in which a handful of elders dominated the CIAM, degrees of complexity” (Mumford, 2000: 239- cism (…). setting the official agenda for design practice and the- 240). In its obvious historicism and academicism, the ory… Team 10 staged a court rebellion stoked by Mundaneum project shows the present non-viability 74 “We are of the opinion that we should construct intergenerational conflict”. of architecture thought of as art. It shows the failure a hierarchy of human association (house, street, dis- of Le Corbusier’s aesthetic and formalistic theories 65 In Rotterdam, reconstruction priorities trict, city) which should replace the functional hierar- (…). In short, all those a priori aesthetic formulae were not immediately given to housing. In- chy of the Chartre d’Athènes. Although it is ex- which have formalistically been deduced from histor- stead, in the beginnings, they were focused tremely difficult to define the higher levels of ical styles, in our times are unproven and unsup- in the reconstruction of the industrial facili- association, the street implies a physical contact com- ported. (…) In our century of machine civilization, ties, as there was no point in providing hous- munity, the district an acquaintance community, and which has no time for ‘art’ and monumental archi- ing if there was no conditions for working to the city an intellectual contact community. In most tecture, any intention to make art instead of houses, sustain economy. In Rotterdam the dock- cases the grouping of dwellings does not reflect any and monuments instead of schools, leads to hybrid lands were first rebuilt, and large-scale reality of social organization; rather they are the re- shapes and impoverishes that work of natural and housing projects only began in the fifties, all sult of political, technical and mechanical expediency. modern beauty which is characteristic of real, perfect located south of the river, in Kleinpolder The aim of urbanism is comprehensibility, i.e. clarity things. (…) The Mundaneum is Reissbrett-orna- and Schiebroek (cf. Dijk, 1999: 100-121). of organization; the community is by definition a mentik, a project born not from real and rational comprehensible thing” (Luchinger,̈ 1981: 31). analyses of the program (…) but from a priori aes- 66 Due to the housing shortage, the post- 75 The Smithson’s diagram was influenced thetics and abstract geometric speculation, following war governments launched programs to by the early XXth century sociologically- a historic stereotype. It is not a solution for realiza- build thousands of prefab houses in a short based notions of the Scottish urbanist Pat- tion and construction, but a composition. Composi- time. They were designed to last only 10 rick Geddes, expressed in his Valley Section. tion: with this word it is possible to summarize all years, but some are still inhabited to this day The Valley Section was initially presented by the architectural faults of the Mundaneum (…). If (cf. Vale, 1995). Patrick Geddes in 1905, in his book Civics: as we have occupied ourselves so carefully with the Mun- 67 The Commission I of CIAM 6 writes: applied sociology, and republished in different daneum project, it is because we believe this work, “The aim of CIAM is to work for the creation of a versions (cf. Ramos, 2013). whose author is a leading and foremost representative physical environment that will satisfy man’s emo- of modern architecture, should serve as a warning to tional and material needs” (Mumford, 2000: 76 In Smithson’s words, “our hierarchy of as- its author and to modern architecture generally. 172). sociations is woven into a modified continuum repre- The Mundaneum illustrates the fiasco of theo- senting the true complexity of human associa- ries and traditional prejudices, of all the dangers of 68 Mumford (2000: 196). tion…we are of the opinion that a hierarchy of the slogan ‘house-palace’, and thus of utilitarian ar- 69 Old guard portrayed by figures such as human association should replace the functional hi- chitecture with an artistic ‘addition’ or ‘dominant’. erarchy of the Chartre d’Athènes” (Agrest, 1991: Le Corbusier, van Eesteren, Sert, Ernesto From here it is possible to go all the way to full acad- 47). Rogers, Alfred Roth, Kunio Mayekawa, emicism and classicism, or on the other hand, to re- Walter Gropius, Hannes Meyer, Siegfried turn to the solid reality of the starting point demon- 77 As later expressed by Van Eyck, they Giedion, José Luis Sert or Fernand Léger. strated so precisely by the motto, the ‘house as a were looking to “conglomeration of buildings in which community lived with all the functions mixed. machine for living in’, and from there, once again to 70 Younger generation portrayed by fig- work towards a scientific, technical, industrial archi- ures such as Alison and Peter Smithson, We didn’t simply believe in the four functions – that story was far too simple” (Risselada & Van Den tecture. Between these two poles, there is space only Aldo Van Eyck, Jacob Bakema, Georges Heuvel, 2005: 330). for half-baked projects and compromised solutions” Candilis, Shadrach Woods, John Voelcker, Alongside with a twin, subsequent, and Willliam or Jill Howell. 60 Mumford’s (cf. 2000) The CIAM dis- more popularized Doorn Manifesto, the State- course on urbanism, 1928-1960 is a comprehen- 71 Frampton (2007b: 271). sive reference in that respect.

314

dynamo who had always managed the secre- ing Kayapó Indians. The dancers form a spi- ment on Habitat can be regarded as a core doc- tariat of the group and one of the greatest ral wall around an open center, expanding or ument of the referential Team 10 group. The responsible for keeping it in activity. In Aldo shrinking, relaxing or tightening as it moves Doorn Manifesto, written in 1954, started as Van Eyck’s words Bakema “was Team 10 post in the rhythm of the dance, breathing with follows: “It is useless to consider the house except box” and “had an unbounded energy (…) a dy- life, and as life: “for each man and all man”; “get as a part of a community owing to the interaction of namo, a huge dynamo” (Risselada & Van Den closer to the center—the shifting center—and build” these on each other. (One had to) study the dwelling Heuvel, 2005: 331). (Strauven, 1998: 346-354). and the groupings that are necessary to produce convenient communities. (But also emphasizing) that 82 Benevolo (2009: 15). 85 Benevolo (2009: 7-8) confirms the idea appropriateness of any solution may lie in the field of of a modernity closure: “Without question, the 83 Aldo Van Eyck, one of the most prom- decisive innovations in our areas took place in the architectural invention rather than social anthropol- inent Team 10 participants, notably ex- period between the two world wars; and this is a very ogy”. pressed a livened ordinary through his built Commented comparison on both the clear historical fact that is even confirmed by recent designs of children’s playgrounds (cf. experiments (postmodernist movements themselves, Statement of Habitat and the Doorn Manifesto Strauven, 1998: 150-169). He was also seeking to recover the ties with the past, only made can be found in Ramos (2013). known for his scientific and philosophical possible thanks to the intellectual aloofness made af- 78 To the records stands that a team of ten interests, with recognized affinities with the ter the first postwar). These years seem prodigious, works of great physicists as Heisenberg or people would organize CIAM 10 in 1956, however, they seem to be increasingly distant and Einstein, the phenomenology of Merleau- “hence Team 10”—as affirmed by Georges Smithson evoke us precisely (in 1981) as ‘the heroic Candilis, “there were ten of us who worked on setting Ponty, or the metaphysics of Bergson. He period of modern architecture’. The present moment also empathized with Lévi-Strauss’s struc- up the tenth CIAM conference – hence, Team 10” can in no way be defined as heroic and the problems turalist work in anthropology, but generally (Risselada & Van Den Heuvel, 2005: 321). we face have become radically different”. The Team 10 was a loose group of individuals, had no particular affinity with the poststruc- with various compositions, spanning turalist philosophers (cf. Strauven, 1998). 86 Cf. Strauven (1998). In 1953, he published an article in the throughout the years. The group was hard to 87 Le Corbusier (1986: 29) writes: “Our eyes delimitate as such, as some elements attended Forum magazine, presenting a photographic report of his trip to different settlements in are made to see forms in light; light and shade reveal all meetings, while others just a few or even these forms; cubes, cones, spheres, cylinders or pyra- the Algerian Sahara. Seven years later, he only to one. With time, a core group became mids are the great primary forms which light reveals recognizable in elements such as Jaap would travel to Mali to study the Dogon settlements. The article was evidence of his in- to advantage; the image of these is distinct and tan- Bakema, George Candilis, Giancarlo di Carlo, gible within us without ambiguity. It is for this rea- terest in the bonds between social and built Aldo Van Eyck, the Smithon’s and Shadrach son that these are beautiful forms, the most beautiful structures. He would later describe those Woods. “According to the perspective taken, the his- forms”. torical source and the time under consideration, one vernacular settlements as prompts of an age- may also include José Coderch, Ralph Erskine, old tradition that do not differ much from 88 Strauven (1998: 359). Amancio Guedes, Rolf Gutmann, Geir Grung, Os- the situation five thousand years ago. Ac- 89 Cf. Jencks (1987). kar Hansen, Charles Polonyi, Brian Richards, Jerzy cording to Van Eyck these vernacular settlements are “the same laboriously fashioned bricks Soltan, Oswald Mathias Ungers, John Voelcker and 90 Venturi’s (1966: 23) words are eloquent: Stefan Wewerka; but even this list can in no way be of sandy mud, then and now; the same sun weakly “Architects can no longer afford to be intimidated by bonding and then harshly disintegrating them; the considered complete, considering the broad context of the puritanically moral language of modern architec- same spaces around a courtyard; the same enclosure; Team 10”(Risselada & Van Den Heuvel, 2005: ture. I like elements which are hybrid rather than 11). There was no such thing as membership; the same sudden transition from light into darkness; ‘pure’, compromising rather than ‘clean’, distorted the same coolness after heat; the same starry nights; they liked to call themselves participants, rather than ‘straightforward’, amibiguous rather the same fears perhaps; the same sleep” (Strauven, which was in itself a statement implying de- than ‘articulated’, perverse as well as impersonal, tachment from the CIAM organization. 1998: 149). He too considered the vernacu- boring as well as ‘interesting’, conventional rather lar traditions intelligibly complementary to than ‘designed’, accommodating rather than exclud- 79 Risselada and Van Den Heuvel (2005: other traditions that western thinking had ing, redundant rather than simple, vestigial as well 321). put between the classical and the modern. as innovating, inconsistent and equivocal rather than 80 With a new avant-garde pointing to the 84 In the first circle, three great traditions direct and clear. I am for messy vitality over obvious inadequacies of functionalist theories, Le Cor- are blended: the classical, immutability and rest, unity. I include the non sequitur and proclaim the busier’s drawing on a copy of a letter illus- with the Parthenon; the modern, change and duality…. I am for richness of meaning rather than trates CIAM’s dethronement, blessing the as- movement with a Van Doesburg design; and clarity of meaning; for the implicit function as well as pirations of the “gens d’Otterlo”. “Le Corbusier’s the archaic, the vernacular of the hearth, with a the explicit function. I prefer ‘both-and’ to ‘either- drawing on a copy of a letter illustrates how CIAM plan of a vernacular village. These were not or’, black and white, and sometimes gray, to black found itself being dethroned at the end of the 50s by a to be considered disjointedly, but integrated or white. A valid architecture evokes many levels of new movement. He saw how a younger generation was so to enrich architecture’s formal and struc- meaning and combinations of focus: its space and its facing up to the future with self-assurance and with a tural potential, in order to meet the com- elements become readable and workable in several concept of its own, and how it was making use of the plexity of contemporary demands. These ways at once. But an architecture of complexity and experiences of the previous 30 years, (to which he him- three paradigmatic elements, united in a cir- contradiction has a special obligation toward the self had contributed so much). In spite of this, and with cle, stood for the realm of architecture, whole: its truth must be in its totality or its implica- some generosity, he was able to give his blessing to the strengthened with the plea: “when is architec- tions of totality. It must embody the difficult unity of aspirations of the ‘gens d’Otterlo’, as he described them ture going to bring together opposite qualities and so- inclusion rather than the easy unity of exclusion. in his letter” (Lüchinger, 1981: 8-11). lutions?”. That is connected to a second cir- More is not less”. cle, which stands for the human 81 Participants of the Team 10 informal 91 Cf. Venturi, Scott Brown, and Izenour relationships, portrayed by a figure of danc- organization would continue meeting until 1981, the year of Jaap Bakema’s death, the

315

other: poststructuralism) gained wider noto- linguistics and anthropology had erred in (1972). riety, with thinkers such as Jacques Lacan aiming in on the terms (notions, structure) (b.1901-d.1981), Roland Barthes (b.1915- and not on the relations between these (the 92 Cf. Tafuri (1976). d.1980), Louis Althusser (b.1918-d.1990), value), that although we consciously perceive 93 Evers and Thoenes (2003: 725). Michel Foucault (b.1926-d.1984), or Jacques things, unconsciously we perceive relations. Derrida (b.1930-d.2004). It has since be- By studying numerous tribes, he concluded 94 Cf. Gropius (1919). come an important method of analysis else- that among early humans, communication 95 Cf. Hüttemann (2017). where. From its inceptions, notable contri- was non-verbally conducted, and that was butions to the field can also be observed only in a later stage that language begun to 96 For instance, Roland Barthes (cf. 1972: through the works of Charles S. Pierce take its use for verbal communicative func- 213-220) defines it as a mode of studying the (b.1839-d.1914), Noam Chomsky (b.1928), tion. Language had evolved for cognitive rules, norms, and organizing structures or Umberto Eco (b.1932), among others. modeling purposes, rather than for the pur- which make meaning possible, an activity, a poses of communication, and therefore it (mental) means not and end. 100 Cf. Barthes (1993). could be regarded more as a mental process than as an instrument for communication. 97 Ferdinand de Sausurre’s work would be 101 The knowledge of a new language implies an appropriate learning of a vocabulary rendered into a posthumous book, the Cours 107 Saussure (1959: 122). de Linguistique Generale, published in 1915 and syntax. For instance, each discipline (e.g. from students’ notes of his classes. The algebra, chemistry, or poetry) has its own 108 “Everything that has been said up to this point book has since been an inspiration, estab- symbolic systems, and practitioners of these boils down to this: in language there are only differ- lishing groundbreaking contributions. know how to handle them. Language can ences. Even more important: a difference generally also be regarded as a source of social and implies positive terms between which difference is set 98 It would not be until the interwar period cultural values, since by learning new words, up; but in language there are only differences without that the approach would get the label ‘struc- as it is more clearly noticeable in children, we positive terms. Whether we take the signified or the turalism’ from the Russian formalists group implicitly acquire the social and cultural signifier, language has neither ideas nor sounds that (1910s-1930s)—with thinkers such as principles implied by those words. (cf. existed before the linguistic system, but only concep- Viktor Shklovsky, Yuri Tynianov, Vladimir Belsey, 2002: 3-5). tual and phonic differences that have issued from the Propp, Boris Eichenbaum, Roman Jakob- system. (…) But the statement [of negative differ- 102 For instance, houses can be connoted son, Boris Tomashevsky, Grigory Gu- ence] is true only if the signified and the signifier are kovsky. According to Eagleton (1996: 85), in language by their shape (e.g. box-like), by considered separately; when we consider the sign in their style (e.g. clean lines), by their price (e.g. “Saussure's linguistic views influenced the Russian its totality, we have something that is positive in its expensive), and so on. We might want to live Formalists, although Formalism is not itself exactly own class (…), their combination is a positive fact” in a so-described art-déco house, but probably a structuralism. It views literary texts 'structurally', (Saussure, 1959: 120). and suspends attention to the referent to examine the we will not be very enthusiastic about living sign itself, but it is not particularly concerned (…) in a so-described decrepit house, even if both 109 “Beside the phonology of species, there is then with the 'deep' laws and structures underlying liter- refer to the exact same house. In any case, a room for a completely different science that uses bi- ary texts. It was one of the Russian Formalists, how- real-estate seller would not advertise an art- nary combinations and sequences of phonemes as a ever - the linguist Roman Jakobson - who was to déco as decrepit, even if the adjective fits. point of departure, and this is something else en- provide the major link between Formalism and mod- tirely” (Saussure, 1959: 50); and “The opposi- 103 When we learn our native tongue, it is tion of two terms is needed to express plurality: either ern-day structuralism. Jakobson was leader of the as if it is transparent, an invisible frame to fōt: fōti or fōt: fēt; both procedures are possible, Moscow Linguistic Circle, a Formalist group the things in the world, even if some of founded in 1915, and in 1920 migrated to Prague but speakers passed from one to the other, so to those things may be imaginary, as for in- speak, without having a hand in it. Neither was the to become one of the major theoreticians of Czech stance those of children’s stories. The fact is whole replaced nor did one system engender another; structuralism. The Prague Linguistic Circle was that we do not realize it, because it comes founded in 1926, and survived until the outbreak of one element in the first system was changed, and this naturally as a mediator with reality. Similarly, change was enough to give rise to another system” the Second World War. Jakobson later migrated when we speak, the language is rendered in- (Saussure, 1959: 85). Barthes adds his own once more, this time to the United States, where he visible to us. (cf. Belsey, 2002: 6-7). encountered the French anthropologist Claude Lévi- thoughts on this issue: “the binary classification Strauss during the Second World War, an intellec- 104 Cf. Saussure (1959: 79-100). of concepts seems frequent in structural thoughts as if tual relationship out of which much of modern struc- the metalanguage of the linguist reproduced, like a 105 Barthes (1972: 219) writes: “structuralism turalism was to develop”. mirror, the binary structure of the system it is de- does not withdraw history from the world: it seeks to The Prague school (1920s-1930s) scribing” (Barthes, 1993: 14). link to history not only certain contents (…) but also would eventually take structuralist notions certain forms, not only the material but also the in- 110 Cf. Saussure (1959: 7-20). outside linguistics, contributing to its expan- telligible, not only the ideological but also the es- sion to a wider scope of symbolic systems. 111 Indeed, all things we come to know, thetic”. Eagleton (1996: 86-87) writes: “The Prague previously unknown to the entire humanity school of linguistics - Jakobson, Jan Mukafovsky, 106 In Lévi-Strauss’ Structural Anthropology or to each of us individually, a name is given Felix Vodicka and others - represent a kind of tran- (1958), social life is portrayed as a system in to. Heidegger notes it when writing: “Lan- sition from Formalism to modern structuralism. which all aspects are linked with one an- guage, by naming beings for the first time, first brings They elaborated the ideas of the Formalists, but sys- other. In Pensée Sauvage (1962), he argues that beings to word and to appearance. This naming nom- tematized them more firmly within the framework of primitive man thinks just as rationally as to- inates beings to their being and from out of that be- Saussurean linguistics. (…) With the work of the day’s man. This mode of thinking is of a dif- ing” (Heidegger, 2002: 46). Prague school, the term ‘structuralism’ comes more ferent degree of a Darwinist sort of view: it 112 Cf. Sturrock (1979: 8). or less to merge with the word ‘semiotics’”. is transformative, instead of evolutionary (cf. Luchinger,̈ 1981: 15-16). 99 It would be mostly in the 1960s in France In his works, Lévi-Strauss focused that that the field of structuralism (or its critical

316

Besides the concepts of signified (in composed of elements that oppose or con- 113 Cf. Barthes (1993). Pierce’s also thing or object) and signifier (in tradict each other; and of elements that re- Pierce’s also sign or representamen, that is, the late them together, resolving or mediating 114 Cf. Saussure (1959: 65-70). representation medium), the concept of in- their oppositions. The myth is seen as a lan- “The linguistic sign unites, not a thing and a terpretant is acknowledged. In language there guage system, which may be broken into name, but a signified (concept) and a signifier is the sound, what it represents, and its rep- smaller individual units, which in turn can be (sound-image). (…) The linguistic sign, as defined, resentation in a mental status derived from read in relation to each other rather than as has two primordial characteristics” (Saussure, cognition. When a significate effect is produced, reflecting a particular version. In the myth, 1959: 66-67). that is, when the representation occurs, it there is hence an underlying set of relations, or 115 This conception also suggests that can become a new signified, producing a re- a type of grammar, which is common in their meaning does not depend on a reference to gression, now needing a further signifier and narrative structures. Lévi-Strauss claims that the world or to ideas. Such can be illustrated an interpretant. In other words, there is a rep- if even the fantastical and unpredictable by the issues of translation, which, as non- resenting relation, where whenever there is products of mythical thought obey universal native speakers know, can sometimes cause an occurrence, there is one thing (the signified, laws, then all human thought must obey uni- embarrassment, as unaware of certain con- or object) being represented by (or: in) an- versal laws. It is most likely impossible to notations carried by certain words they can other thing (the signifier, or representamen), and verify such idea without any remaining rea- cause offence on the native speaker by inap- being represented to (or: in) a third thing sonable doubt. Anyhow, in smaller sets of propriate use. For instance, the word horse is (the interpretant). In subsequent levels, the in- inquiry, analogous processes can be verified, possibly quite straightforwardly translatable terpretant may become thing, or representamen, or in the least be given a more tangible sense. among different natural languages. How- of a yet another interpretant. Hence, these For instance, in the example of chess, it can ever, other words may not be so much. For may possibly produce an infinite unfolding be observed that there is a limited set of ele- instance, different words with equivalent sequence, where signs may (de)generate ments and rules, which nonetheless provide meaning (e.g. Portuguese gato vs English cat), from the original, producing new meanings. ever-different, endless outcomes. Likewise, same words with equivalent meaning, (e.g. “One of Peirce's central tasks was that of analyzing such universality, rather than being regarded Portuguese nostalgia vs English nostalgia), or all possible kinds of signs. For this purpose he intro- as limiting or reducing scope, can instead be no straightforward translation (e.g. Portu- duced various distinction among signs, and discussed regarded as a solid argument for nurturing guese saudade). various ways of classifying them. One (early) set of richness and diversity. distinctions among signs was introduced by Peirce 119 Cf. Damásio (1996). 116 Expressing a trichotomic reasoning, ra- (was) on whether the particular instance of the sign In last instance, the arguments may re- ther than dichotomic, Pierce adds a new ele- relation is ‘degenerate’ or ‘non-degenerate’. The no- ment to Sausurre’s methodological distinction of ‘degeneracy’ here is the standard mathemati- sult in a sort of discussion of neurological processes, in understanding the body’s ways tion. He expressed a preference throughout cal notion, and as applied to sign theory non-degen- to produce memories, language, movement, his work of grouping things in threes, of tri- eracy means simply that the triadic relation cannot adic relations: trichotomies. Although the be analyzed as a logical conjunction of any combina- or to regulate its own temperature or other functions, and so forth. In another perspec- reasons for such preference are not entirely tion of dyadic relations and monadic relations. More tive, the arguments may eventually redound clear, it was seemingly based in what he exactly, a particular instance of the obtaining of the called phaneroscopy, that is the observation of sign relation is degenerate if and only if the fact that to a point where there are no longer imaginable words good enough to describe such phenomenal appearances, of which he regu- a sign s means an object o to an interpretant i can processes, as in the interplay of signifier and larly commented in the phaneron the phe- be analyzed into a conjunction of facts of the form nomena just fall into threes, irreducibly ex- P(s) & Q(o) & R(i) & T(s,o) & U(o,i) & signified we would ultimately enter in a cy- clically redundant process from where noth- pressing triadic relations. “He regularly W(i,s) (where not all the conjuncts have to be pre- ing could be extracted. commented that the phenomena in the phaneron just sent). Either an obtaining of the sign relation is non- do fall into three groups and that they just do display degenerate, in which case it falls into one class; or it 120 Cf. Barthes (1993). irreducibly triadic relations. He seemed to regard this is degenerate in various possible ways (depending on matter as simply open for verification by direct in- which of the conjuncts are omitted and which re- 121 Cf. Sturrock (1979: 6-8). spection”. There are phenomena that seem to tained), in which cases it falls into various other clas- 122 As Fromm (1966) writes: “Freud and naturally fall in such a tripartite division, ses” (cf. Burch, 2013). As in Sausurre, here however Pierce’s recurrence is such for any- Marx have in common that both (…) are concerned again, the distinction is purely methodologi- not as much with superficial phenomena as rather thing imaginable is likely to be driven by cal. something other than the mere acknowl- with driving forces, which act in certain directions edgement of examples. “Perhaps it was the in- 117 Cf. Belsey (2002: 11). and with varying intensity, and evoke phenomena fluence of Kant, whose twelve categories divide into that are changing and temporary. Psychoanalysis is 118 One of the most well-known features four groups of three each. Perhaps it was the triadic the only scientific form of psychology, as Marxism is of his work is the devising of universal laws structure of the stages of thought as described by He- the only scientific form of sociology. Only these two through the study of myths of different cul- gel. Perhaps it was even the triune commitments of systems allow us to understand the hidden driving tures around the world. As he asserted, from orthodox Christianity (which Pierce seemed in some forces behind the phenomena and to predict what the multiple products derived from culture extent to subscribe). Certainly involved was Peirce's happens to an individual in a certain society when, and cultural practices, myths can certainly be commitment to the ineliminability of mind in nature, under certain conditions, the acting forces evoke phe- regarded as the most random and fantastic. for Peirce closely associated the activities of mind with nomena that seem to be exactly the opposite of what However, paradoxically, if abstractly regard- the triadic relation that he called the ‘sign’ relation they actually are. (…) This does not mean that ing their essential narrative elements, they (…). It is difficult to imagine even the most fervently Marx or Freud were absolute determinists (…) seem to possess many similarities. Their to- devout of the passionate admirers of Peirce, of which Freud’s and Marx’s theories have a common element tality is made up of basic, constant, universal there are many, saying that his account (or, more ac- in the assumption that man is driven by forces. Re- structures, through which they can be ex- curately, his various accounts) of the three universal alization and awareness of these will lead to libera- plained. categories is (or are) absolutely clear and compelling” tion, even though only within the boundaries set by The most general version of a myth is (cf. Burch, 2013).

317 135 Peirce (1931-58: (2)308). (cf. Lynch, 1960), or Gordon Cullen’s Town- society and human nature”. scape (cf. Cullen, 1988), first published in 136 Lacan (1966: 9). 1961. 123 Cf. Wittgenstein (1995). 137 Cf. Baudrillard (1994). 148 Rapoport (1969: 5-6) defines the ver- 124 Cf. Sturrock (1979: 3-5). 138 Cf. Barthes (1972: 218). nacular building as being characterized by: 125 Cf. Sturrock (1979: 5-6). “lack of theoretical or aesthetic pretensions; working 139 Ultimately, as Barthes (1977: 42-43) with the site and micro-climate; respect for other peo- 126 Sartre (1994: 567-568) writes: “Freedom notes in his essay on Rhetoric of the Image, the ple and their houses and hence for the total environ- in fact, (…) is strictly identified with nihilation. The denotation is purely utopian: “the denoted im- ment, man-made as well as natural; and working only being which can be called free is the being which age can appear as a kind of Edenic state of the im- within an idiom with variations within a given order. nihilates its being. (…) Freedom is precisely the be- age; cleared utopianically of its connotations, the im- (…) Although a vernacular always has limitations ing which makes itself a lack of being. But since de- age would become radically objective, or, in the last in the range of expression possible, at the same time sire, (…) is identical with lack of being, freedom can analysis, innocent. This utopian character of denota- it can fit many different situations, and create a place arise only as being which makes itself a desire of be- tion is considerably reinforced by the paradox (…) at each. It is, of course, precisely this limitation of ing; that is, as the project-for-itself of being in-itself- that the photograph (in its literal state), by virtue of expression which makes any communication possi- for-itself. Here we have arrived at an abstract struc- its absolutely analogical nature, seems to constitute a ble. To communicate, one must be prepared to learn ture which can by no means be considered, as the na- message without a code. Here, however, structural as well as use language – which implies the ac- ture or essence of freedom. Freedom is existence, and analysis must differentiate, for of all the kinds of im- ceptance of authority, trust, and a shared vocabulary. in it existence precedes essence. The upsurge of free- age only the photograph is able to transmit the (lit- Another characteristic of vernacular is its additive dom is immediate and concrete and is not to be dis- eral) information without forming it by means of dis- quality, its unspecialized, open-ended nature, so dif- tinguished from its choice; that is, from the person continuous signs and rules of transformation. The ferent from the closed, final form typical of most high- himself. But the structure under consideration can be photograph, message without a code, must thus be style design. (…) Vernacular is also characterized called the truth of freedom; that is, it is the human opposed to the drawing which, even when denoted, is by the greater importance and significance of relation- meaning of freedom”. a coded message”. ships between elements, and the manner in which 127 Heidegger (2002: 45-46) writes: “Accord- 140 Călinescu (1987: 92) writes: “(…) Moder- these relationships are achieved, rather than by the ing to the usual account, language is a kind of com- nity as a ‘tradition against itself’. When modernity nature of the elements themselves. (…) Since munication. It serves as a means of discussion and comes to oppose concepts without which it would have knowledge of the model is shared by all, there is no agreement, in general for achieving understanding. been inconceivable (…) it is simply pursuing its deep- need for drawings or designers. A house is meant to But language is neither merely nor primarily the au- est vocation, its constitutive sense of creation through be like all the well-built houses in a given area. The ral and written expression of what needs to be com- rupture and crisis”. construction is simple, clear, and easy to grasp, and municated. The conveying of overt and covert mean- since everyone knows the rules, the craftsmen is called ings is not what language, in the first instance, does. 141 Călinescu (1987: 68-69) writes: “(…) the in only because he has a more detailed knowledge of Rather, it brings beings as beings, for the first time, suffix ism – indicative, among other things, of irra- these rules. (…) As long as the tradition is alive, into the open. Where language is not present, as in tional adherence to the principles of a cult – was this shared and accepted image operates; when tradi- the being of stones, plants, or animals, there is also added to the term modern not by the moderns them- tion goes, the picture changes. Without tradition, no openness of beings, and consequently no openness selves but by their adversaries. The defenders of clas- there can no longer be reliance on the accepted norms, either of that which is not a being [des sical tradition were thus able to suggest that the atti- and there is a beginning of institutionalization” Nichtseienden] or of emptiness”. tude of the moderns was biased, that their claim of (Rapoport, 1969: 5-6). being superior to the ancients contained an element of 149 To a degree, this kind of description re- 128 Belsey (2002: 52) writes: “Identity implies dubious and finally disqualifying partisanship. An flects what perhaps is one of the greatest sameness: that’s what the word means. Subjects can expression of intellectual contempt, ‘modernism’ was myths of anthropological functionalism, ex- differ from themselves”. little more than a terminological weapon in the hands pressed by Bronisław Malinowski, where of the antimoderns”. 129 Belsey (2002: 57-58) writes: “We are born different cultures in different people are de- organisms (of course), and we become subjects. How? 142 Heisenberg (2000: 25). terministically related through the habitat, By internalizing our culture, which is inscribed in the via natural conditions and the like—steep signifying practices that surround us from the mo- 143 Barthes (1972: 219-220). mountains, plains, rain, snow, heat, cold, ment we come into the world. We turn into subjects 144 Cf. Craige (1982: 15-26). flood, dry, and so on. To some extent, the in the process of learning language, which means that notion also reflects structuralism’s Univer- we become capable of signifying”. 145 Lévi-Strauss (1979: 19-20). salist intentions, as expressed by Lévi- Strauss, but also inevitably an evolutionary 130 Cf. Barthes (1972: 213-220). 146 For instance, Doxiadis (cf. 1968) devel- perspective. oped the cross-disciplinary Ekistics. The Lévi-Strauss (1979: 15-16) writes: “the 131 Cf. Gil (2010). term, coined by himself, refers to a cross- feeling in Malinowski was that the thought of the cultural study of human settlements, over- 132 Cf. Wittgenstein (1995). people he was studying was, and generally speaking lapping fields such as human geography, en- the thought of all the populations without writing 133 Barthes (1972: 215). vironmental psychology, and sciences of the which are the subject matter of anthropology was en- built environment. The human settlements 134 Barthes (1972: 216) writes: “It is not the tirely, or is, determined by the basic needs of life. If are organized through five ekistics elements: nature of the copied object which defines an art you know that a people, whoever they are, is deter- nature, anthropos, society, shells, and net- (though this is a tenacious prejudice in all realism), mined by the bare necessities of living – finding sub- works. it is the fact that man adds to it in reconstructing it. sistence, satisfying sexual drives, and so on – then (…) We recompose the object in order to make cer- 147 For instance, in theoretical develop- you can explain their social institutions, their beliefs, tain functions appear, and it is, so to speak, the way ment, manifestations can be found in works their mythology, and the like This very widespread that makes the work; this is why we must speak of such as Kevin Lynch’s The Image of the City conception in anthropology generally goes under the the structuralist activity rather than the structuralist work”.

318

156 Cf. Thompson (1945). 163 Cf. Reed (1998). name of functionalism. The other fashion is not so much that theirs is an inferior kind of thought, but 157 Cf. Sindicato Nacional dos Arquitectos 164 According to Alvar Aalto, “still the main a fundamentally different kind of thought. This ap- (1961). task of architecture is to humanize the Machine Age. In doing this, however, it must always work proach is exemplified by the work of Levy-Bruhl, 158 Frank Lloyd Wright writes: “The three with form” (Schildt, 1998: 179). who considered that the basic difference between major inventions at work building Broadacres, 'primitive' thought - I always put the word 'primi- wheter the powers that over-built the old cities like it 165 Alvar Aalto affirms: “Nature, biology, has tive' within quotes - and modern thought is that the or not, are: (1) The motor car: general mobilization rich and luxurious forms; with the same construc- first is entirely determined by emotion and mystic rep- of the human being; (2) Radio, telephone and tele- tion, the same tissues, and the same principlesof cel- resentations. Whereas Malinowski's is a utilitarian graph: electrical intercommunication becoming com- lular organization, it can create billions of combina- conception, the other is an emotional or affective con- plete; and (3) Standardized machine shop produc- tions, each of which represents a definitive, highly- ception; and what I have tried to emphasize is that tion: machine invention plus scientific discovery” developed form. Man’s life belongs to the same cate- actually the thought of people without writing is, or (Sergeant, 1976: 130). gory” (Schildt, 1998: 93). can be in many instances, on the one hand, disinter- ested - and this is a difference in relation to Mali- 159 Cf. Sergeant (1976: 121-136). 166 With notions such as these, it is opened nowski - and, on the other hand, intellectual - a dif- up a perspective on which the architectural 160 Cf. Aymonino (1976: 245-249). ference in relation to Levy-Bruhl”. experience is sensorially engaged with the 161 Frank Lloyd Wright writes: “What would entire body. It is not to be merely formalis- 150 Rapoport (1969: 108-109) refers that “it be really sensible in this matter of the modest dwelling tically retrieved, as if bold photos could ever has been suggested that primitive and preindustrial for our time and place? This house for a young jour- reflect the spatial experience. While pictures vernacular builders always use materials most con- nalist, his wife, and small daughter is now under may pick particular details or individual ar- veniently available, and that, since materials deter- roof. Cost: Fifty-five hundred dollars including architectural gestures, spaces are ought to be mine form, the nature of local materials determines chitect’s fee of four hundred and fifty. Contract let to imperceptibly engaging, as, unlike their pub- form. These oversimple beliefs are not necessarily Bert Grove. To give the small Jacobs family the ben- licizing photos, they have no ideal view- true; it has already been shown that the same mate- efit of the advantages of the era we live, many simpli- point: spaces need not to be asked for per- rials may produce very different forms (…) There are fications must take place. Mr. and Mrs. Jacobs must mission. many instances where choice of materials is deter- themselves see life in somewhat simplified terms. mined by the tendency to use permanent solid mate- 167 Cf. Weston (2002). What are the essentials in their case, a typical case? rials, such as stone, for cult buildings and tombs, It is not necessary only to get rid of unnecessary com- 168 “(We) saw in (Nigel Henderson’s) photo- while houses are built of more perishable materials. plications in construction, necessary to use work in graphs a perceptive recognition of the actuality (…) It remains true that what is not available can- the mill to good advantage (off-site prefabrication), around his (neighborhood): children’s pavement play- not be used, which is another example of negative necessary to eliminate, so far as possible, field labor, graphics; repetition of ‘kind’ in doors used as site impact – of things becoming impossible rather than which is always expensive: it is necessary to consoli- hoardings; the items in the detritus on bombed sites, inevitable. Because of the low criticality a choice ex- date and simplify the three appurtenance systems – such as the old boot, heaps of nails, fragments of sack ists, and use of materials is decided by fashion, tra- heating lighting and sanitation… At least this must or mesh and so on. Setting ourselves the task of re- dition, religious proscription, or prestige value. be our economy if we are to achieve the sense of spa- thinking architecture in the early 1950’s we meant 151 Evolutionary cultural processes have ciousness and vista we desire in order to liberate the by the ‘as found’ not only adjacent buildings but all been subject of intensive research, namely people living in the house” (Sergeant, 1976: 16). those marks that constitute remembrances in a place from anthropological perspectives. The and that are to be read through finding out how the 162 The Usonian houses would develop 2002 book by Stephen Shannon, Genes, existing built fabric had come to be as it was... Thus through diverse concepts, addressed to dif- memes, and human history: Darwinian archaeology the ‘as found’ was a new seeing of the ordinary, an ferent audiences (and pockets). The do-it and cultural evolution, is a good example of openness as to how prosaic ‘things’ could re-energize yourself, as expressed in the Berger House such research trend (cf. Shennan, 2002). our inventive activity”(Heuvel et al., 2004: 18). (1950), was designed to be built by its own- 152 Stewart Brand notes that ordinary ers in stages. The usonian automatic, as exem- 169 The Smithson’s would later affirm: “we buildings traditionally built have a deep cul- plified in the Adelman House (1953), elimi- were concerned with the seeing of materials for what tural embedment, raised from evolutionary nated unions, masonry and plasters in favor they were: the woodiness of wood; the sandiness of principles. To build these people use quite of a dry construction. The prefabricated houses, sand” (Heuvel et al., 2004: 18). straightforward rules of thumb. For in- such as the Raymond Carlson House (1951), 170 Cf. Lynch (1960). stance, ‘this is how you build a roof so it where despite the intentions to economize, doesn't leek’ or ‘this is how you build a fire- and as shipping and assembling doubled the 171 Cf. Cullen (1988). place so it doesn't smoke’. These are clear, costs, it became unaffordable. Or the self- logical rules, that everyone within a certain build methods, where a set of recommenda- 172 In House form and culture cf. Rapoport cultural context will under-stand, rules that tions such as for designing houses to look big- (1969). are embedded in a culture and do not change ger or work better inside and outside were 173 In Housing by people: towards autonomy in widely publicized in popular magazines (cf. or are only slowly changed. The clear princi- building environments (cf. J.F.C. Turner, 1976). ples guiding them makes it possible for rules Sergeant, 1976). to be slowly and gradually tested, and by that Albert Frey would also make a very par- 174 With the development of the Segal Sys- slowly and gradually embedding new princi- ticular account on his perspective of the tem, and his book Home and Environment (cf. ples into it. By this process, when a rule gets bonds of nature, industry and man, sensi- Segal, 1953). improved slightly, it gets embedded in the tively expressed in his book In Search of a Liv- 175 In Supports. An Alternative to Mass Hous- culture (cf. Brand, 1995). ing Architecture (1939) and thoughtfully de- ing (cf. Habraken, 1972). With the posterior signed in his House Frey I (1941-53), where The Structure of the Ordinary: Form and Control 153 Cf. Gonçalves (2012). furthermore a sense of open-endedness is in the Built Environment, (cf. Habraken & too present (cf. Frey, 1999). 154 Cf. Le Corbusier (2007). 155 Cf. Rudofsky (1987).

319

187 Heuvel et al. (2004: 18). the risk of trivializing structuralism in architecture. Teicher, 1998) a synthesis of the principles The assertion that certain elements have to be com- 188 Cf. Reyner Banham (1955). is made, distinguishing form, the physical order, bined according to certain rules is so vague as a de- from place, the territorial order and understanding, 189 Reyner Banham (1955) makes reference scription of the approach to the design that it can the cultural order, observing those through to an Alison Smithson’s article where, about ultimately be applied to almost any architectural or concepts such as levels, hierarchies, structures, a small apartment renovation in the Soho, design activity” (Valena et al., 2011: 275). patterns, systems and types. she refers: “It is our intention in this building to 203 In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant ana- have the structure exposed entirely, without interior 176 With his How Buildings Learn, What Hap- lyzes the limits of human reason. He con- finishes wherever practicable. The contractor should pens after they are Built (cf. Brand, 1995). cludes that the three things that involve our aim at a high standard of basic construction, as in a moral concerns, God, immortality, and freedom, 177 Cf. Antonio Lopes Correia, Simões da small warehouse”. can only be thought and not known effec- Silva, and Murtinho (2016). 190 Cf. Reyner Banham (1955). tively. Thus, our reason cannot objectively 178 Cf. Tafuri (1976). know the objects that correspond to the 191 Cf. Calabuig, Gomez, and Ramos concepts of thought: God, immortality and free- 179 Cf. Rossi (1969). (2013). dom. In this way, Kant sees the need to go beyond the reflexive and intellectual use we 180 Cf. Grassi (1983). 192 Cf. Herman Hertzberger (2000: 218- make of reason for a reason that also has a 219). 181 Cf. Paola (2013). practical use. This is what Kant called practi- 193 Alison Smithson (cf. 1974) writes: “Still cal reason. Thus, if we do not get to know 182 “So here I stand before you preaching organic existing in the simple Arab town, an interchangea- these concepts intellectually, and for not to architecture: declaring organic architecture to be the bility, in which the neutral cube contains a calm cell accept them dogmatically, it is necessary to modern ideal and the teaching so much needed if we that can change; from home to workshop; green-gro- fundament them through practical reason. It is are to see the whole of life, and to now serve the whole cery to paraffin store; an alley of houses in whose inherent in practical reason to admit the reality of life, holding no ‘traditions’ essential to the great midst is a baker, made into a Souk by simple expe- of freedom, of immortality and of God. Kant TRADITION. Nor cherishing any preconceived dient of adding pieces of fabric over the public way… wrote: “I have therefore found it necessary to deny form fixing upon us either past, present or future, as needs grow”. knowledge in order to make room for faith”. But in but – instead – exalting the simple laws of common this phrase ‘faith’ presupposes a fundament sense – or of super-sense if you prefer – determining 194 Cf. Calabuig et al. (2013). by practical reason, not by revelation and be- form by way of the nature of materials, the nature of lief. purpose so well understood… Form follows func- 195 Cf. Smithson (1974). tion? Yes, but more important now, Form and 196 Cf. Feliciano (2009). 204 Cf. Schwartz (2004). Function are One”— Frank Lloyd Wright, An Organic Architecture, 1939 (cf. Wright & 197 With members such as Kiyouori 205 Cf. Brand (1995). Kikitake, Kisho Kurokawa, Fumiko Maki, Pfeiffer, 1992). 206 Herman Hertzberger (2005: 22) writes: Kenzo Tange, or Arata Isosaki. 183 Cf. Lobos and Donath (2010). “The character of each area will depend toa 198 The latter is one of the few remaining large extent on who determines the furnish- 184 Cf. Whyte (1985). built metabolist specimens to these days. The ing and arrangement of space, who is in Étienne-Louis Boullée’s both astound- construction, which took only one month to charge, who takes care of it and who is or ing, and somewhat credible, utopian imagery complete, consisted of 144 pre-cast concrete feels responsible for it”. had been leaving a referential imprint in the capsules of 2.3×3.8×2.1m attached to one th 207 Herman Hertzberger (2005: 92). architect’s imaginary since the XVIII cen- of the two shaft cores. The capsules were to tury, with designs such as the Cénotaphe de Tu- be individually removed or replaced as 208 André Malraux (1901-1976), created the renne (1786) or the Cénotaphe a Newton (1795). needed, as if a space-station. Nevertheless, concept of Musée Imaginaire, (from the ho- th In the XX century, the utopian theme had the constructive interface between the cap- monymous essay published in 1947), consid- left its mark in the 1920s with the Crystal sules and the shafts, led such to be econom- ering that the reproduction of works of art Chain Letters [Die glaserne Kette] of Bruno and ically prohibitive practice (cf. Bergdoll, 2008: through photographic print would be an ex- Max Taut, Walter Gropius, Hans and Was- 144-147). cellent way of boosting contact the general sili Luckhardt, and Hans Scharoun, with public with the art world, promoting an in- their visions of an ideal communal society in 199 Cf. Andreotti and Costa (1996). dividual or collective imaginary. When the a series of astounding descriptions and 200 Sadler (2005: 137). museum gained popularity, its function was drawings of a fantasy world. Among these, to bring together works of art deemed of probably the most famous is Bruno Taut’s 201 Herman Hertzberger (2005: 92). quality and to use them to better teach a mystical Alpine Architecture. story of culture and history. With photog- 202 For that matter, we can refer Reinhard 185 Cf. Le Corbusier (1980). Köning’s arguments: “The structuralist activity raphy, it became practical to make reproduc- tions of art works and put them into books. consists primarily of the combination of particular el- 186 The Smithson’s entry for the Golden Anyone who could look at a book had access ements within a particular framework or set of rules. Lane competition (1952), alongside Robin The rules are understood as a kind of deep or pri- to a virtual museum, democratizing learning. Hood Gardens (1972), can be considered as a The concept would be used among the Fo- mary structure that serves to organize different ele- re-interpretation of Le Corbusier’s Unité rum group, regarded as an unconscious field ments within a whole, (where) the whole is more im- d’Habitation (1947). Instead of corridors in portant than the sum of its parts. (…) It is of knowledge within which the architect the middle, there are corridors on the sides, ̈ important not only what parts belong to the whole, finds forms (cf. Luchinger, 1981: 19). and the contact with the ground floor is dif- but also how these parts relate to each other. How- ferent, nonetheless, the sociability principles 209 Cf. Brand (1995). ever, a valid criticism of this approach to what is are all there, through large circulation spaces supposedly a structuralist design method that it runs and the intention to bring nature to the block.

320

house. Mies would in fact go to great extents, perhaps the study of minerals, and later to linguistics 210 John John F. C. Turner (1976: 18) absurd, to curtail indications of residency. Though and thereon to humanities, anyhow related writes: “How many admirers of Brazilia, for ex- the house was designed as a weekend retreat for a to an essential condition of things or of ample, stay longer than necessary to see the principal single person, the architect incorporated a second Form. Structure derives from the Latin struc- buildings and, perhaps, one of the superblocks? And bathroom. During those occasions in which the doc- tura (from the verb struere, i.e. ‘to build’), how many designers of such places, prefer to spend tor, or Mies himself, had company, the additional originally used to mean both (1) the archi- their holidays in places like Mykonos?”. bathroom was to eradicate traces of occupancy, con- tectural schema of a building, (2) the order- cealing the domestic in favor of formal purity. Mies’s ing of organs in the human body, and (3) in 211 In such context stand theoretical works assistant Myron Goldsmith explained simply that rhetoric, the ordered connection between such as Edward Hall’s The Hidden Dimension designing and building an additional bathroom was the thoughts and the words in a speech. The (1966), Amos Rapoport’s House Form and more elegant than for a guest to come in and see meanings have broadly persisted until the Culture (1969), or Constantinos Doxiadis’ Farnsworth’s nightgown hanging. The architect did present times (cf. Cornelis, 1967). As to the Ekistics (1968). Edward T. Hall argues that acknowledge some of Farnsworth’s needs and ulti- notion of system, it can early be found in the “one of man’s most critical needs (…) is for princi- mately conceded to design a freestanding wardrobe, realms of diverse areas such as philosophy, ples for designing spaces that will maintain a healthy but not without protest”. theology or law. From its most primitive us- density, a healthy interaction rate, a proper amount ages, the concept has been related with the of involvement, and a continuing sense of ethnic iden- 214 Cf. Ábalos (2003). question of the organization and codifica- tification. The creation of such principles will require tion of knowledge. Modernly, that became the combined efforts of many diverse specialists all 215 Cf. Breatore (2013). clearer in philosophical thinking since Leib- working closely together on a massive scale” (Hall, 216 Schneider and Till (2007) have classified niz’s (b.1646–d.1716) System Nouveau, first 1990: 168). Rapoport writes: “The more ex- these two notions as hard and soft. In hard, published in 1695 (cf. Bertalanffy, 1969: 10- treme the constraints, the less the choice, but some elements that more specifically determine 17). With the Enlightenment, it becomes in- choice is always available. Constraints make it nec- the way design may be used, with a certain delibly related with an idea of method, epit- essary to provide spaces desired for various human tendency to both visually and technically, omizing a materialistic and mechanistic per- activities by the most direct means. Limited materi- foreground their flexibility. Whereas in soft spective typically associated with scientific als and techniques, used to their ultimate, must be referring to tactics which allow a certain in- thinking. used to define place”. determinacy, generally working on the back- However, it should also not be forgotten its 212 Herman Hertzberger (2005: 47) writes: ground. These may work at different levels, understanding through the Kantian notion “The whole suppressive system of the established or- depending on a user or designer perspective, of architectonic—and thus of systematicity. In- der is geared to avoiding conflicts; to protecting the and even may occur simultaneously. deed, more than speaking of a system, instead it often makes more sense to speak in the individual members of the community from incur- 217 Cf. Leupen (2006). sions by other members of the same community, with- Kantian architectonic sense of systematicity. out the direct involvement of the individuals con- 218 Cf. Leupen (2006). In his The Critique of Pure Reason, first pub- cerned. This explains why there is such a deep fear lished in 1781, Kant described it as “the unity 219 The related Einstellung effect, describes of disorder, chaos and the unexpected, and why im- of the end, to which all the parts of the system relate, a state of mechanization of complexity in personal, ‘objective’ regulations are always preferred and through which all have a relation to each other, problem solving, where the prior knowledge to personal involvement. It seems as if everything communicates unity to the whole system, so that the of a certain solution leads to mechanize anal- must be regulated and quantifiable, so as to permit absence of any part can be immediately detected from ogous problems in similar complex fashion total control; to create the conditions in which the our knowledge of the rest; and it determines a priori (even if not adjusted), instead of using the suppressive system of order can make us all into the limits of the system, thus excluding all contingent simpler routes that are engaged in non-pre- lesses instead of co-owners, into subordinates instead or arbitrary additions”(cf. Kant, 2013). In a viously informed cases (cf. Luchins, 1942). of participants. Thus the system itself creates the al- Kantian sense, reason cannot be fulfilled ienation and, by claiming to represent the people, ob- 220 The original expression, das Ganze ist simply with a mechanical conception. How- structs the development of conditions that could lead mehr als die Summe seiner Teile, is often trans- ever, Kant too acknowledges two key dis- to a more hospitable environment”. lated as “the whole is greater than the sum of its tinct faces of reason, the theoretical and the parts”. However, according to Koffka, it practical reason. If the metaphysical ground 213 Matthew Breatore (2013: 18-19) writes: should be translated instead as “the whole is of the unity of nature is an indispensable no- “Of the many complications between the two parties other than the sum of its parts”, since notions tion for both the theoretical and practical [Mies and Farnsworth], perhaps the principle prob- such as ‘greater’ or ‘bigger’ would imply an functions of reason, on the other hand such lem was a lack of mutually agreed upon terms. That unwanted additive valuation (cf. Hothersall, can only be satisfied in the latter. Thus, in the house was designed as a weekend retreat for a 2004). this perspective, the objective reality of the single person rather than a full-time residence further theoretical reason can only find its suitable unburdened Mies – or so he believed – of the require- 221 Lévi-Strauss (1979: 9). proof in the practical (cf. Ostaric, 2009). Ob- ment to account for domesticity and its inherent effects serving the issue from the opposite direc- on a living space, aspects of modern life for which he 222 Both terms, which find a correspond- tion—i.e. following the system over the system- had little patience. Consequently, he and Farnsworth ence in the theoretical developments of aticity way—for instance we have that disagreed on what constituted the essential with re- Structuralism or of Systems Theory, have numerous environments pose questions gard to possessions to be kept at the house. One such aroused in the natural sciences, although in such as: what is a system?, how is it mani- dispute was over the necessity of a clothes closet. a later stage the notion of structure would fested?, on what boundaries?, exhibiting cer- Farnsworth insisted that, as a resident of the. house- assume a great notoriety from the social im- tain distinctions that are susceptible of lead- hold, she needed a place to hang her dresses. In plications of the studies of language. The no- ing to certain areas of though. Thus posed Mies’s opinion the doctor required no more than a tion of structure can early be found related from a practical side, the problem is ex- single dress to keep at the weekend house. This inci- with the idea of form reflecting the internal tremely vast, and it would not likely conduct dent demonstrates the extent to which the architect disposition of bodies. In the Enlightenment, to an examination of all the variants of the desired to minimize not only the house’s presence in it would enter the vocabulary of biology and nature, but also traces of the occupant within the

321

to the system developmental biology nowadays. (…) environment. In a closed system, its ‘walls’ term. From the biological systems, to the In the 1940's he conducted his theory of open systems do not allow energy or matter transfers, and systems of coordinates, to systems of values, from a thermodynamical point. (…) As a metathe- hence is more likely to weaken or even dis- and so on, we would have to go through ory derived from both theories, Bertalanffy introduced appear than an open system, unless an out- every area of knowledge, and that is simply the GST as a new paradigm which should control side entity ‘holds’ it, exogenously inputting unfeasible. the model construction in all the sciences (…). As energy into it. On the other hand, the more opposed to the mathematical system theory, it de- open it is, the more likely it is for the system 223 Cf. Staib (2008). scribes its models in a qualitative and non-formal- to thrive in the long run, as it is exchanging 224 Cf. Knaack, Chung-Klatte, and ized language. Thus, its task was a very broad one, energy by dynamically interacting with its Hasselbach (2012). namely, to deduce the universal principles which are surroundings. valid for systems in general. In a first step he refor- 231 If not more, ultimately a thermody- 225 The notion departs from Systems Theory mulated the classical concept of the system and deter- body of work, which was primarily devel- mined it as a category by which we know the relations namic system would be subjected to gravity, with eventual interactions that are (still) un- oped by the biologist Ludwig von Ber- between objects and phenomena. The new system con- known to physicists talanffy, constituting a broadly-purposed ef- cept now represents a set of interrelated components, fort to bind a conceptual with an operational a complex entity in space-time which shows struc- 232 For instance, an analogy could be made sense of systems. It fundamentally refers to tural similarities (isomorphisms). It constitutes itself when a company has severe financial prob- the interdisciplinary study of the abstract or- in such a way that the systemic particles maintain lems and as consequence is bought by an- ganization of phenomena, regardless their their structure by an assemblage process and tend to other, injecting the first with fresh currency. type, substance, spatial or temporal scales of restore themselves after disturbances – analogous to Another known example occurs in current existence, investigating the common princi- the features of a living organism. Since those isomor- software development technologies, where ples to complex units, as well as the models phisms exist between living organisms, cybernetic two trends can be observed, with the said that can be used to describe them. Its intents machines, and social systems, one can simulate inter- open or closed philosophies, each potentiating are not to establish a unique general theory of disciplinary models and transfer the data of a scien- their digital ecosystem through different everything, replacing the role of other theories tific realm to another one. (…)” (cf. sorts of constraints (and freedoms). in specific subjects. Its aims are, however, Brauckmann, 1999). located somewhere in between the specific- 233 Systems’ concepts such as openness vs ity of the content and the generality of its 226 Cf. Laszlo and Krippner (1997: 7). closeness, along with other systems’ character- frame, searching an optimum degree of gen- 227 Ackoff (1981: 15-16) apud Laszlo and istics that can be inferred, such as hierarchy, erality, close enough not to lose the object, interchange or adaptability, are architectural Krippner (1997). distant enough to be able to regard the ob- conceptions that have seen a great boost of ject in a larger context. 228 Cf. UT (2013). theoretical development from the 1960s on- In Systems’ praxis, evolutionary sys- wards, following a methodological trend in 229 For instance, in “The fundamental systems- tems design is one of the most recent ad- the discipline. Some of its children develop- interactive paradigm of organizational analysis fea- vances, and one example of the conceptual ments in architectural theory and practice tools which would fit as an outcome would tures the continual stages of input, throughput (pro- can still be observed, such as in the Open- cessing), and output, which demonstrate the concept be the diagrammatic-like cognitive maps. Building movement (cf. Kendall & Teicher, of openness/closedness. A closed system does not in- More direct applications can be found 2000), where both stability and change are among e.g., Biology, Engineering, Sociology, teract with its environment. It does not take in infor- addressed as realities in the building envi- mation and therefore is likely to atrophy, that is to Psychology, Communication, Cybernetics ronment, regarding them not as static pieces vanish. An open system receives information, which or Information Theories. In more recent ap- stagnant in time, but as flowing living organ- proaches, dynamical systems theory, family it uses to interact dynamically with its environment. isms which are hard-wired to cope with Several system characteristics are: wholeness and in- systems theory, dissipative structures and change. Nonetheless, to these days it re- terdependence (the whole is more than the sum of all holistic paradigms are the areas that have mains dubious how to proceed with some of been subject to more intensified exploration parts), correlations, perceiving causes, chain of influ- such approaches, given that they must be ence, hierarchy, suprasystems and subsystems, self- among researchers (cf. Laszlo & Krippner, framed within contexts where there is nec- regulation and control, goal-oriented, interchange 1997). essarily a social and cultural control exerted with the environment, inputs/outputs, the need for In the history of Systems Theory, as a through building regulations and the like. more or less defined branch of research, balance/homeostasis, change and adaptability (mor- many relevant thinkers can be named, rang- phogenesis) and equifinality: there are various ways 234 Cf. Marchal (1975). to achieve goals. Different types of networks are: line, ing from diverse fields such as Philosophy, 235 Marchal (1975: 464). Physics, Computer Sciences, or Economics, commune, hierarchy and dictator networks” (UT, however, a Biologist, Ludwig von Ber- 2013). 236 In The Human Condition, Hanna Arendt (2013: 154) writes: “The ideal of usefulness itself, talanffy, stands out for its precursor role. 230 As entropy implies, systems will dissi- With an implicit aspiration of answering to pate energy unless they are maintained by an like the ideals of other societies, can no longer be conceived as something needed in order to have something the increasing fragmentation and redun- external entity, that is, unless if energy is pro- else… Obviously there is no answer to the question dancy of scientific and technological re- vided from outside the system. Internal rela- search and decision-making, von Bertalanffy tions within a system towards which energy which Lessing once put to the utilitarian philosophers of his time: ‘And what is the use of use?’ The developed what he called the Allgemeine Sys- is not externally inputted, will tend to de- perplexity of utilitarianism is that it gets caught in temlehre (General Systems Theory), a found- grade until reaching a state of thermody- ing and referential work for the Systems namic equilibrium, where it stagnates. For the unending chain of means and ends without ever arriving at some principle which could justify the cat- Theory movement. instance, observing the classic open/closed dis- egory of means and end, that is, of utility itself… In the 1930's Bertalanffy had “formulated tinction, we have that, as opposed to an the organismic system theory. His starting point was open system, a closed system is fundamen- to deduce the phenomena of life from a spontaneous tally a system that does not interact with the grouping of system forces – comparable, for instance,

322

of Taste (1979). For a perspective on the blur- them, is to discover their origin and primitive cause. Utility established as meaning generates meaning- ring of distinctions between a high culture of This is what must be called ‘type’ in architecture, as lessness… In the world of homo faber, where eve- the elite and a low culture of the masses, the in every other field of inventions and human institu- rything must be of some use, that is, must lend itself Frankfurt School enquiry is referential. As it tions”. as an instrument to achieve something else, meaning has been scholarly observed, the distinction 246 The currently pervasive characterizing itself can appear only as an end, as an ‘end in itself’ between high and culture has disappeared, fol- which actually is either a tautology applying to all lowing an interest in popular culture, which notions of genotype and phenotype, would only be introduced by Wilhelm Johannsen, in ends or a contradiction in terms”. includes such diverse media as magazines, 1908. The genotype is the descriptor of the ge- comic books, television, or the internet. Ac- 237 For instance, when designing a house, companying it, has occurred a reevaluation nome, which is the set of physical DNA enerally, unless of an exceptional im- molecules inherited from the organism's of the conservative view regarding mass cul- portance, the architect most likely will not be parents, whereas the phenotype is the de- ture as degraded, and elite culture as uplift- prioritizing the thinking of say, the chemical ing. Following it, rather than an aesthetical scriptor of the phenome, i.e., the manifest properties of a certain material in use, over physical properties of the organism, its phys- or intellectual difference, the distinction be- say, the spatial or structural considerations. iology, morphology and behavior (cf. tween high and low have been gradually re- Likewise, to assure that a certain paint will garded as political distinction. For a perspec- Lewontin, 2011). endure a certain amount of time, the archi- tive of high culture in the formulation of tect will just have to trust in the product 247 Cf. Habraken and Teicher (1998: 248- national identity, cf. Ernest Gellner’s Nations specifications, as he will not likely be testing 250). and Nationalism (1983). it himself. 248 Durand had worked for the architect 242 Cf. Tafuri (1976: 24-39). 238 Cf. Rapoport (2005). Étienne-Louis Boullée and the civil engineer Jean-Rodolphe Perronet. In 1795, he would 243 There are Egyptian references to the 239 According to Agudin (1995: 373), “the human anatomy as early as 1600 BC. The become a Professor of Architecture at the notion of a primitive form, considered as the model École Polytechnique, exerting a wide influence. Greeks made considerable advances in no- or principle from which architecture derives, is one of The poetic symbolism of Boulée’s approach menclature and methods. Leonardo da Vinci the fundamental ideas associated with the notion of himself was trained in human anatomy, be- contrasts with Durand’s rationality. The Type. Every theorist, who has been concerned with technological demands of an enlightened ginning in 1489 a series of drawings depict- the issue of the origins of architectural form, has as- post-Revolutionary France where imbued in ing the ideal human form (cf. Persaud, signed to the primitive form a different meaning, in the Polytechique philosophy. Architectural Loukas, & Tubbs, 2014). accordance with the conceptual framework within students were given a solid mathematical which he operated. Vitruvius, for example, was 244 The requirement for a type specimen is just and scientific ground. working within the frame of the Greek doctrine of one of the many rules of scientific nomen- imitation. According to this, the original form or clature and alpha taxonomy for describing a 249 These include Egyptian, Greek or Ro- man temples, orders details or decorative model from which architecture would have derived new species. In older usage (pre-1900 in objects, but also mosques, Gothic churches, was provided by nature. Laugier's frame of reference botany), a type was understood more as a was the emerging epistemology of the seventeenth and taxon rather than a specimen (cf. A. S. domes, thermal buildings, amphitheaters, Roman, Greek or Palladian houses and pal- eighteenth centuries, which put the emphasis on the Hitchcock, 1921). relation between perception and acquisition of aces, gardens, and so forth. 245 Quatremère de Quincy writes (in Hays, knowledge. Accordingly, his primitive hut was more 250 Cf. Rapoport (2005). a concept in the mind than a physical structure cre- 1998: 618-619): “the word type presents less the ated by nature.” image of a thing to copy or imitate completely than 251 Cf. Agudin (1995). the idea of an element which ought itself to serve as 240 In The Prodigious Builders, first published rule for the model… The model, as understood in 252 “We can distinguish that both the idea of ‘type’ in 1977, Bernard Rudofsky (1977: 13) writes: the practical execution of an art, is an object that and the idea of ‘module’ are two different but inter- “Vernacular architecture owes its spectacular longev- should be repeated as it is; the type, on the contrary, connected ways of perceiving reality. It does not mat- ity to a constant redistribution of hard-won is an object after which each [artist] can conceive ter if these are real or mere abstractions as long as knowledge, channeled into quasi-instinctive reactions works of art that have no resemblance. All is precise they allow us to obtain a useful model” (Duarte, to the outer world. So-called primitive peoples have and given in the model; all is more or less vague in 1995). none of the devil-may-care attitude when confronted the type. At the same time, we see that the imitation 253 In nature, if we would ask what two dis- with the reality of their environment. Above all, they of types is nothing that feeling and intellect cannot tinct animals have in common, we could an- have no desire to dominate it. Admittedly, the ver- recognize, and nothing that cannot be opposed by swer animal cells. If we included a tree, we nacular’s unforgivable weakness is constancy. Un- prejudice and ignorance. This is what has occurred, could say cells. If we included a mineral: at- like the apparel arts or pedigreed architecture, it fol- for example, in architecture. In every country, the art oms. If we would stop here, atoms would be lows no fads and fashions but evolves only of regular building is born of a pre-existing source. our type, our most general category, but also imperceptibly in time. As a rule, it is tailored to hu- Everything must have an antecedent. Nothing, in our smallest module. If we would continue, man dimensions and human needs, without frills, any genre, comes from nothing, and this must apply we would eventually reach the most basic el- without the hysterics of the designer. (…) In some to all inventions of man. Also we see that all things, ement to all things in the Universe, which places the exclusive reliance on local building materi- in spite of subsequent changes, have conserved, al- being the smallest module would also be the als alone guarantees the persistence of time-honored ways visibly, always in a way that is evident to feeling most general type, and vice-versa (cf. Duarte, construction methods. Conversely, when alien mate- and reason, this elementary principle, which is like a 1995). rials and alien methods are introduced, local tradi- sort of nucleus about which are collected, and to tions wither away, customs are displaced by trends, which are coordinated in time, the developments and 254 Cf. B. Mitchell (1965). and the vernacular perishes”. variations of forms to which the object is susceptible. Thus, we have achieved a thousand things in a genre, 255 Cf. Duarte (1995). 241 For a broad, class-based social perspec- and one of the principal occupations of science and tive on high culture and ‘taste’, cf. Pierre philosophy, in order to understand the reasons for Bourdieu’s Distinction: A Social of the Judgement

323

265 As Laugier notes, to man some fallen 283 Cf. Leupen (2006). Fundamentally, 256 This notion is quite well illustrated in branches in the forest are the right material Leupen maintained Duffy’s scenery terminol- the shape grammar’s rationale, which was for his purpose; he chooses four of the ogy, excluded Brand’s stuff because of its “one of the earliest algorithmic systems for creating strongest, raises them upright and arranges non-architectural character, and added access and understanding designs directly through computa- them in a square; across their top he lays (general access to enclosed spaces and/or tions with shapes” (Knight, 1989). In it, is con- four other branches; on these he hoists from individual homes, such as stairs, corridors, veyed the idea of forms to be produced by two sides yet another row of branches lifts or galleries), detaching it from services. basic objects via particular sets of operators which, inclining towards each other, meet at For instance, the latter makes more sense and rules, of relations which are established their highest point. He then covers this kind under a spatial-constructive flexibility analy- to develop (cf. Stiny, 2006). By deriving of roof with leaves so closely packed that sis framework, but not so much in a lifecycle shape-grammar rules, multiple shapes can be neither sun nor rain can penetrate. Thus, analysis as it often can be part of the structure obtained with a recognizable pattern, which man is housed (cf. Laugier, 1755). or of the these authors call scenery. has its origins in the grammar’s rules. As increasingly different types are combined, or 266 Cf. Lavin (1992). 284 Leupen (2006: 223) writes: “the effectiveness of the frame concept and the disconnection be- more initial objects or rules are added to the 267 Frampton (1995: 4). algorithm, also potentially the end result will tween frame and changeable layers, are first and fore- be more complex. Additionally, in order to 268 Cf. Frampton (1995). most design issues. Choosing the right construction control of the outputs will require handling and materials for the excision is the architect’s job 269 Pevsner (1969: 30). more variables by not letting them to chance. (…). To leave it entirely to the building industry brings with it the risk that the technical solution for 270 Viollet-le-Duc’s approach was initially 257 Agudin (1995: 373). the excision would overshadow the architectural im- synthesized in his Dictionnaire Raisonée de l'Ar- pact of the frame”. 258 In some of the most depurated expres- chitecture Française du XIe au XVIe Siècle [“A sions of a conceptual approach the De Stijl Reasoned Dictionary of French Architecture from 285 Cf. Parkes (2011). For instance, in Ja- movement, would be one of the major con- the Eleventh to the Sixteenth Century”], first pub- pan, the expected and accepted lifespan of a tributors to explore a direct bond between lished between 1854 and 1868, bonding the house is smaller than in Europe, which re- the abstract (conceptual) in art with architec- need for a rational, non-arbitrary spirit, with sults from an ancient tradition of timber ture, where too the type acts, if not least as the Gothic architecture. In the posterior En- construction, but also from a philosophical an implied operator. As van Doesburg tretiens sur l’Architecture [“Conversations on Ar- ethos, that of facing basic reality from the writes, “Elimination of all concepts of form in chitecture”], first published between 1863 and idea of mujō (impermanence). the sense of a fixed type is essential to the healthy 1872, he analyzed the great architecture of development of architecture and art as a whole (…) the past, evidencing that each epoch derived 286 The notions of architecture as its produc- The new architecture is elemental (…), functional, its greatness from an underlying rationality. tion and as its experience often come up inter- (…), formless and yet exactly defined; that is to say, In it, he has also concordantly systematized twined. Broadly, we can say that architec- it is not subject to any fixed aesthetic formal type. not only his approach to architecture, but tural production concerns on the bring into (…) The new architectural methods know no closed also to architectural education, in a manner being of an inhabitable artifact, in a process type, no basic type, (but instead) the new architec- that totally diverged with the Beaux-Arts that is intrinsically of a social nature. Inhab- ture is open (made of) space and time” [van school, which he had avoided and even des- itable because serving for human dwelling, Doesburg, Theo (1924), Towards a plastic ar- pised in his youth. thus implying a boundary condition (e.g. in- chitecture, (in Conrads, 1970: 78-80)]. terior-exterior, open-closed, light-shadow, 271 In that regard, quoting Viollet-le-Duc, heavy-weightless, and so forth) whose dis- 259 With the rise of the cognitive sciences, Summerson (1998: 156) writes: “if we get into tinction can have different degrees of clarity. fields suc-h as the psychology of form, have the habit of proceeding by the light of reason, if we Artifact, because it results of a human-made put forth their influence, as with the case of erect a principle, the labour of composition is made construction. In its production, typically there Arnheim’s structural skeleton conception, de- possible, if not easy, for it follows an ordered, me- is a movement from a mental set (design) to rived from his research based on Gestalt’s thodical march towards results which, if not master- an executive set (construction). These concur psychology: “In speaking of ‘shape’ we refer to pieces, are at least good respectable works--and capa- in providing content, manifested in form, to two quite different properties of visual objects: (1) ble of possessing style”. the experiential stage. In turn, this will inform the actual boundaries produced by the artist (the subsequent interpretations (e.g. a new de- 272 Pevsner (1969: 26-27). lines, masses, volumes), and (2) the structural skel- sign), and so forth. It is from the bonds of eton created in perception by these material shapes, 273 Leupen (2006: 29). such a back and forth motion, that architec- but rarely coinciding with them. (...) The same structure evolves and can aspire to deliver a tural skeleton can be embodied by a great variety of 274 Cf. Habraken (1972, 1976, 1988a). meaningful sense. shapes (...). (Moreover), if a given visual pattern can 275 Cf. Duffy (1993). Dwelling is here understood in its yield two different structural skeletons, it may be per- broadest sense of humanly built place, as ex- ceived as two totally different objects (...), (as is the 276 Cf. Brand (1995). pressed by Heidegger (1951): “[…] today’s case) of the famous duck-rabbit” (Arnheim, 1974: houses may even be well planned, easy to keep, at- 277 Cf. Leupen (2006). 92-95). tractively cheap, open to air, light, and sun, but-do 278 Cf. O'Neill (1986). the houses in themselves hold any guarantee that 260 Cf. (Stiny, 2006). dwelling occurs in them? Yet those buildings that are 279 Cf. Habraken (1988b). 261 Cf. Duarte (2000). not dwelling places remain in turn determined by 280 Cf. Habraken (1988b). dwelling insofar as they serve man’s dwelling. Thus 262 Cf. Alexander (1979); Alexander, dwelling would in any case be the end that presides Ishikawa, and Silverstein (1977). 281 Cf. Duffy (1993). over all building. Dwelling and building are related as end and means. However, as long as this is all we 263 Agudin (1995: 371). 282 Cf. Brand (1995).

264 Cf. Frampton (1995).

324

the concerted efforts of reconstruction ap- 303 Larousse dictionary defines prefabrica- have in mind, we take dwelling and building as two plied in Lisbon, in the aftermath of an earth- tion as a “construction system to carry out separate activities, an idea that has something correct quake in 1755. The name stands for cage works using standardized components, or in it. Yet at the same time by the means-end schema (gaiola) and as reference to the political leader components, manufactured in advance and we block our view of the essential relations. For responsible for its undertaking, the equiva- that are assembled according to a predeter- building is not merely a means and a way toward lent to today’s prime-minister, known as mined plan”. In Oxford dictionary, is de- dwelling—to build is in itself already to dwell”. Marquis of Pombal. scribed as “manufacture sections of (a building or piece of furniture) to enable quick 287 Cf. Fitchen (1981). 295 Cf. NESDE (2005). The example of the assembly on site”. As to Webster dictionary, As Fitchen (1981: 1) writes: “the primary struc- Portuguese Gaiola Pombalina is remarkable in it is defined as “to fabricate the parts of at a tural problem in building is that of spaning space. this respect. The construction system, which factory so that construction consists mainly Basically, there are not very many systems of doing became an architectural and engineering of assembling and uniting standardized this: the post and lintel, the arch with its vault and landmark at the time, used wood elements parts”. Encyclopædia Britannica defines it as dome derivatives, the truss, the metal skeleton, the whose juxtaposition resembled a cage “the assembly of buildings or their compo- suspension cable, and, largely in the twentieth cen- (‘gaiola’ in Portuguese), and was influenced nents at a location other than the building tury, the thin shell, typically of double curvature. In by naval construction and used standardized site”. the medieval period, in western Europe, it was the principles. Nonetheless, the system is not vault that was almost exclusively the system for span- merely a constructive system, it is part of a 304 Many have sought to define prefabrica- ning space in masonry. But the medieval vault system typical enlightenment-style proposal acting tion, or to use other words to describe the underwent remarkable diversity of shape, and devel- on a considerably large urban ground, affect- basic principles behind the approach. In a oped the most effective, the most daring and expres- ing it at all levels: functionally, programmat- 1951, a study by Burnham Kelly (Kelly, sive forms by the time the Gothic era was in full ically, urban, and so on. To prevent future 1951), through the Albert Farwell Bemis Foun- flower”. disasters, the gaiola pombalina was thought of dation– one of the most relevant institutions to have anti-seismic properties. Construc- producing research on housing in the pre- 288 According to Christian Schädlich (in tively, it is a tridimensional wooden structure fabrication-wise important post-WWII pe- Staib, Dörrhöfer, & Rosenthal, 2008: 19), embedded in masonry walls. The earthquake riod in the USA – it is acknowledged the dif- “the iron industry performed the function of a pece- had demonstrated that the masonry walls of ficult consensus on a definition for the term maker for the general industrialization of the build- current use at the time were simply not ca- prefabrication. ing industry. It developed those elements of industrial pable enough to absorb and dissipate the en- Definitions of fellow contemporary au- technologies relevant to building: from the disman- ergy produced by such a powerful force. In- thors are cited in this study, ranging from a tling of the product into large elements, their prefab- spiration came from naval construction, specific to a generic extreme definition, rication in the factory and mechanized assembly, to namely on the great structural performance starting by the one considered has being the the standardization of dimensions and forms for the of ships relatively to the dynamic actions most consensual: (1) A prefabricated home purpose of serial production, and on to new organi- transferred by the seas. The military engi- is one fabricated prior to erection, in con- zational structures of the construction business”. neers involved in the reconstruction made trast to the conventionally built home which 289 Cf. Passanti (1997). an analogy of such behavior with the build- is constructed piece by piece on the site ings’ behavior during an earthquake. There (1947 apud Kelly, 1951); (2) Prefabrication 290 Aymonino (1976: 126). was no doubt that the great behavior of the is a question of degree, if the field operation 291 Le Corbusier (1986: 6-7). boats was related to a tridimensional struc- is essentially assembly, rather than manufacture made up of deformable elements, which ture, you have prefabrication. The amount 292 Dom-Ino was to be fabricated out of simultaneously resisted to tensile and com- of scrap and waste may be taken as a rough standardized elements to be attached to one pressive strengths and to the way the con- index of the degree of prefabrication another. It reflected Le Corbusier’s famous nections between the different elements was (Fisher, 1948 apud Kelly, 1951); (3) Prefab- motto that “house is a machine for living” since made, enabling an articulated whole of dif- rication is a movement to simplify construc- it related both industrial cutting-edge (con- ferent elements. tion by increasing the proportion of work crete use was yet not very common at the completed before erection (1945 apud Kelly, epoch), a social answer to dwell the masses 296 Cf. Bigott (2005); Ibach (2003). 1951); or (4) Prefabrication is a state of mind and the ability to do so using industrialized 297 Cf. Bigott (2005); Giedion (1941). (McLaughlin, 1945 apud Kelly, 1951). While and standardized components. Dom-Ino is the latter statement may be seen as ex- first, and foremost, a theoretical exercise in- 298 “What a linguist should never do is just define tremely generalist, making virtually any defi- spired in industrial mass-production con- a very expressive language which allows self-reference, nition possible within it, it may also be un- cepts. However, by using concrete technol- or reference to truth or reference to knowledge and derstood as a conceptual frame, set for ogy, the system is conceived to a high degree belief, and then proceed as if nothing could ever go enabling different levels of what might be of in-situ production and therefore, to some wrong” (Van Eijck, 1995). established for the term according to the extent, contradictory to its own industriali- scope in which is used in each case. 299 Cf. 'Building' (2014). zation proposal. Nevertheless, despite some Three main ideas arise from the defini- observable misunderstandings about what is 300 Cf. Kieran and Timberlake (2004); tion survey portrayed in Kelly’s work: (1) as industrial-production and mass-production, Woudhuysen and Abley (2004). the dictionary definitions also implied, it it stands a major influential design proposal. seems to convey a spatial and temporal lapse Cf. 'Fondacion' (2012); Le Corbusier (1960, 301 Cf. Edge (2002). between a sort of previous controlled con- 1986). 302 The values are retrieved from the Ger- struction environment and a final in-situ, not so controlled, construction environ- 293 Cf. 'Building' (2014). man context, a highly industrially developed country with great tradition of industrializa- ment; (2) a sort of layering, or hierarchy of 294 The Gaiola Pombalina is a groundbreak- tion in construction, from which the figures processes, through the acknowledgement of ing complex system, acting in multiple de- can plausibly be regarded as a benchmark. sign scales, which was developed as part of

325

make like, liken, compare; copy, imitate; feign, pre- Distinction between prefabrication and the notion of degree; (3) finally it is described tend), later “to gather together” from ad- (i.e. to) preassembling, as with fabrication and assembling, as a way towards simplification of construc- + simulare (i.e. to make like). may potentially be ambiguous, as is evi- tion processes. denced in some attempted definitions311. In 308 Joining together by means of bolting, In a contemporary work by Senaratne, this particular sense, the more general pre- welding, gluing, nailing, stapling and so on. Ekanayake, and Siriwardena (2010), an over- making could be an option to set things clear, view on more recent definitions is described: 309 From the Latin “prae” (i.e. before). yet this is of no common use, hence also im- (1) Prefabrication is the transferring stage of practical. Premanufacturing is also quite sug- construction from field to offsite (Tatum, 310 Etymological root is prefabricate: rec- gestive, yet the construction industry is site Vanegas, & Williams, 1986); (2) Prefabrica- orded from 1932, from pre- + fabricate; short- specific, requiring, even in the most opti- tion is making of construction components ened form prefab is attested from 1937; mized cases, in-situ as well as ex-situ work. at place different from the point of final as- meaning prefabricated housing is recorded from This means there are construction events sembly with a likely better control of the in- 1942. happening outside the factory, therefore its herent complexity within the construction scope is short because it suggests a re- 311 Other words may mislead or confuse process (Bjornfot & Sarden, 2008, apud with fabrication. Such is the case of manufactur- striction to factory environment. The term Senaratne et al., 2010); (3) Prefabrication is a off site fabrication coined by Gibb (1998), and ing [root is manufacture, i.e., something made by manufacturing and pre-assembly process, widely used in the UK, also fells short for hand, from Latin “manu”, ablative of “manus” generally taking place at a specialized facility, (i.e. hand) + “facture” (i.e. a working)], which the same reasons. in which various materials are joined to form Despite the possible ambiguity between suggests factory production and includes a component part of the final installation edifying or building and construction, the word both fabrication and assembling. Such is also (Chiang et al., apud Senaratne et al., 2010). the case of making [root is “make”: to arrive at, preconstruction could be relevantly considered, From these, Senaratne et al. (2010) reach as it seems to have all it takes to convey a or manner in which something is put together - their own definition: “Prefabrication is a manu- proper terminology, and as additionally re- from Old English “macian” (i.e., to form, con- facturing and pre-assembly process, whereby, construct, do; prepare, arrange, cause; behave, fare, mits to the specific industry we are here construction components are made at a location different cerned with. Indeed, the word preconstruction transform), from West Germanic “makon” from the place of final assembly, under specialized is even used in some cases, as some literature (i.e., to fashion, fit) and from Proto-Indo Eu- facilities with different materials, may lead to better ropean “mag-”, (i.e., to knead, mix; to fashion, fit occurrences demonstrate. Yet, its reference control of the inherent complexity within the con- is not formally noted, as it does not appear or macerate)], which also covers them, alt- struction process”. in dictionaries, and its use is secondary when hough not restricted to a factory outcome. As with Kelly’s, the idea of a temporal Another possibility would be production [root compared with prefabrication, which addition- lapse between two different construction ally has a wider usage in multiple natural lan- is produce: bring into being; to develop, extend, environments is also present, as it is the idea guages - it is observable that prefabrication has from Latin “producer” (i.e. lead or bring forth, of layering (in Senaratne et al. referred as draw out), from “pro-” (i.e. forth) + “ducere” (i.e. commonly used forms in the main spoken components within different spatial and tem- languages in the world, as in also the main to bring, lead)], but this is even more general, poral frames) or even the idea of simplification western languages, and so revealing ex- likely to come to be related with any sort of (in Senaratne et al. referred as control, if one industry, or any sort of product. The latter is tended unanimity: prefabrication (English), pre- understands it as a means for the end of sim- fabricación (Spanish), pré-fabricação (Portu- hence impractical for our purpose, which is plifying). guese), préfabrication (French), vorfertigung foremost related with an architectural, or The sixty years separating Kelly’s from Sena- constructive sense, and not necessarily with (German), prefabbricazione (Italian). ratne’s surveys on the word, apparently do a commercial one. There is also constructing not reveal major differences, albeit the major 312 Cf. Ballard and Arbulu (2004). (root is construct: from the Latin “construere”: differences on how processes that surround heap up, pile up together, accumulate; build, make, 313 In Gibb’s (cf. 1998) words, prefabrication it are referred. These are, to say the least, erect), which can be related to a sense of fab- is a “useful but imprecise word to signify a trend in demonstrative of an updated technological ricate and assemble. On the other hand, con- building technology. (…) If prefabrication was re- state of the art, which as in any case safe- structing may seem of practical use, since it lated to every factory manufactured product, the term guarded the word in its popular, common disambiguates the relation with the con- could be stretched so wide as to lose all meaning”. use. These are just two examples of ap- struction industry that we find in production, proaches towards a definition, yet their com- 314 Cf. Gibb (1998). but in another hand might not be very help- prehensiveness seems through enough for ful since it does not particularly express a 315 On a historical perspective, the term admitting a good level of plausibility in the sense of factory outcome. Also edifying and prefabrication is quite recent. In the western conclusions. building convey a deep architectural sense (cf. world, the term formally arouse from the 305 Etymological root is fabricate: from Frampton, 2002: 25-42). Edifying [root is ed- spoils of WWI to generalize a type that had Latin fabricatus, pp. of fabricare (i.e. make, con- ify: from the Latin “aedificare”, from aedes (i.e. progressively been breed since the burst of struct, fashion, build, construct, forge, shape) from a building, or, even more originally, a hearth) the Industrial Revolution, with the construc- fabrica. and fiacre (i.e. to make) or building [root is build: tion of colonial English settlements, in USA, from late Old English “byldan” (i.e., construct Australia and elsewhere, since the early 306 Properties such as acoustical, chemical, a house) verb form of “bold” (i.e., house), from XVIIth century. In countries such as Japan, electrical, environmental, mechanical, opti- Proto-Germanic “buthlam” (i.e., building a its development is inextricably linked with cal, thermal and so on (e.g. shape, density, house), from Proto-Indo European “bhu” (i.e. evolution of age-old practices of wood con- tensile strength, conductivity), by means of to dwell), and from root “bheue-” (i.e., to be, to struction. Indeed, the notion of prefabrica- techniques of molding, cutting, heating, exist, or to grow)], in the same logic as construct- tion had already become traditional in coun- mixing, separating, and so on. ing (and as with fabricate vs assembly ambigu- tries such as the USA or Japan by the time it 307 Etymological root is assemble: from ously related with constructing), could also be French “assembler” (i.e., come together, join, a possibility, but its use is not found in liter- unite; gather’), from Latin “assimulare” (i.e., to ature, hence of no practical use.

326

LT/T1N series, used in the light commercial powering up to 40 000 hp each, are made in got to reference dictionaries in the 1930’s in vehicles of the Volkswagen LT range (owned Denmark, by MAN. Its construction resem- the western world. by the Volkswagen Group) and the Mercedes- bles a gigantic 3D puzzle, of 31 prefabri- Benz Sprinter (owned by the Daimler Group), cated mega-sections, enabling the reduction 316 Cf. Oliver (2007: 9-18). which have synergies under the same plat- of time at the dock. The first of the twenty 317 Cf. Kelly (1951). form. Triple E contracted to be built by HHI- GM, Toyota, VW, Mercedes, Chrysler and DSME was scheduled for an astonishing 318 Cf. Kieran and Timberlake (2004); R. E. others have modular platforms upon which tight schedule of 38 weeks, quite remarkable Smith (2010); van den Thillart (2004). they can design different niche models to ap- for a 58 000 tons of steel put to float. The 319 Cf. Bergdoll, Christensen, and peal to different market segments. production is not entirely automated. Start- ing with an army of cutting and welding ro- Broadhurst (2008); Staib et al. (2008). 325 In 2015, in a $5 billion operation, with bots, but also using a lot of human labor, 320 Cf. Woudhuysen and Abley (2004). each unit costing around $50 million, Em- parts grow bigger and bigger until finally a braer’s newest aircraft, the KC-390 airlifter mega-block arises. However, most remain- 321 Cf. 'Forbes' (2015). has been set to compete with the old C-130 ing labour in the final assembly and fitting is from Lockheed Martin. Its components are 322 The tier terminology is especially com- made by human hands, including welding built in several countries. The operation is mon in the automotive industry. A tier-1 can together of major sections, the placement of centralized in Embraer’s Eugenio de Melo engi- supply one or several OEMs simultaneously. hundreds of kilometers of wires and pipes, neering facility in São José dos Campos, Bra- For instance, Exedy is a tier-1 clutches sup- or the painting work. About 250 people zil. Czech manufacturer Aero Vodochody de- plier to 11 Japanese car manufacturers along work on each ship in the final stages of con- livers the rear fuselage; Argentina’s Fabrica with Ford and GM. Following the same logic, struction, at the dry dock. Despite the high Argentina de Aviones, builds the cargo ramp tier-2 companies are the key suppliers to degree of manual labor, after being trans- door, tail cone and spoilers; Portugal Engineer- tier-1 suppliers, without supplying a product ported in site, or overseas by specialized ing Manufacturing (OGMA), provides fuselage directly to OEMs. There is an interchanging transporters, each mega-section is dropped panels, fairings and doors; St. Louis-based logic in the terminology, in which a single by monster cranes into the dry dock, and is LMI Aerospace, supplies the leading-edge company may be a tier-1 supplier to an neatly aligned within a precise four millime- slats; Spain’s Aernnova, is responsible for the OEM company and a tier-2 supplier to an- ters of the adjacent block, so to be welded composite flaps, ailerons and rudder. All the other company, or may be a tier-1 supplier together by dozens of individual welders. different facilities work in vertical integration. for one product and a tier-2 supplier for a 332 Such commitment to quality begins different product line. That depends on sev- 326 Referring to 2014 (cf. 'Forbes', 2015). with R&D, for which they have their own eral factors, such as the businesses strategies HHI Maritime Research Institute and HHI In- and agreements, or the internal norms and 327 Cf. 'Airbus' (2015). dustrial Research Institute, or collaborating with requirements that the higher-tiers or the 328 For that matter, Airbus developed their the Techno Design Institute and Electromechanical OEMs themselves have. Sometimes compa- own specialized five-airplane fleet of giant Research Institute, working in a range of pro- nies find it convenient to distinguish even air carriers, the Belugas, dimensioned to carry jects to improve ship performance and qual- further tier levels, with tier-3 companies sup- any of the major airplane construction com- ity. The company has made considerable ef- plying tier-2 firms, and tier-4 companies as ponents, from vertical tail planes, to fuselage forts for a broad integration of IT’s systems. providers of basic raw materials, such as or full wings. Through a 3D Aveva® CAD system, an En- steel and glass, to higher-tier suppliers. Fi- terprise Resources Planning system to support nally, it is worth stressing that tiers are not 329 Two of these locate in Europe, the orig- effective resources management, and a Prod- official terms, they are more terms of a de- inal in Toulouse, France (building A320s), uct Lifecycle Management system, they claimed scriptive nature, and although more fre- and the biggest in Hamburg, Germany they had been able to increase efficiency in quent, they are not exclusively used by the (A318s, A319s, A320s and A321s). The ship design and construction. They have automotive industry. Moreover, the concept more recently open is located in Tiajin, their own data center, and a shipyard wide of tier does not reflect how big or important China (A319s and A320s), and there is one wireless internet network, which widely con- a company is, it mostly indicates who the opening in 2016 in the USA (in Mobile, Al- tributes for real time communications be- end user of that company’s product is. In abama, to build A319s, A320s and A321s), tween the construction and the design and any case, the terminology simplifies the the homeland of its main competitors. management offices. In 2000, they had tracking of the complex reality of the pro- 330 For instance, MAN’s maritime two- opted for the Siemens Teamcenter® software duction relations. stroke engine ME or MC series, able to de- to improve the integration of their manage- 323 Kieran and Timberlake (2004: 20). liver a top power of over 82 000 Kw (or ment and R&D information. Only consider- ~110 000 hp), equips large vessels. ing these and other concerted IT’s integra- 324 That for instance the case of the tion efforts, they claim they had since been 331 The Triple E design is made by Maersk Volkswagen Group Platform, in which there is able to achieve a total of US$ 9.8 million in a transversal codification of components, staff, in the company’s headquarters in Co- savings, with increased productivity and penhagen, Denmark, under the supervision enabling, for instance, an Audi to share mod- quality. ules, or a group of modules (i.e. a platform), of head naval architect Troels Posborg. with a Volkswagen, a Seat or a Skoda. An Audi Construction takes place across three differ- 333 Cf. Kieran and Timberlake (2004). A7, a VW Tiguan, and a Porsche Cayenne on ent shipyards, in China and South Korea, 334 Frampton (2007a: 124). the same platform can hit 3 different price and with the final assembly in HHI-DSME’s points sharing the same chassis/foundation, Goeje Island shipyard, in South Korea. The 335 Cf. Edge (2002). thus saving time and money in the develop- Triple E’s two propellers, of 90 tons each, are ment process. There are even cases in which cast in Germany, by MMG, a specialized 336 (cf. Kostof, 1986; Robinson, Jamieson, components are shared in joint-venture with foundry which builds more than 200 ship other OEM companies, as is the case of propellers every year, and the two engines, Volkswagen’s joint-venture platform

327

an upper level of capabilities. Humans seek the fron- content to the user, making the customer Worthington, & Cole, 2011). tiers of creativity, the highest reaches of consciousness aware of the product to the point of the pur- and wisdom. This has been labeled “fully functioning chase, the product-pull involves strategies to 337 Cf. Crowley (1998). person”, “healthy personality”, or as Maslow calls motivate customers to actively seek the 338 The value of a building element and the this level, “self-actualizing person”. In Maslow's hi- product. The Dictionary of International Trade costs of transporting determines the eco- erarchic theory of needs, all basic needs are instinc- (Hinkelman & Putzi, 2005: 144) defines the nomical transport radius. To optimize de- toid, equivalent of instincts in animals. Humans pull strategy as “a production and distribution ployment, the order of loading the elements start with a very weak disposition that is then fash- strategy based on specific customer demand. In a pure onto the vehicles should be dictated by the ioned fully as the person grows. If the environment is pull strategy only goods and services actually ordered assembly sequence on the building site. Op- right, people will grow straight and beautiful, actual- by customers are produced and shipped; there is no timal assembly processes can be achieved if izing the potentials they have inherited. If the envi- inventory of completed products. The term is used in building elements can be unloaded directly ronment is not “right” (and mostly it is not) they will many fields to describe decision making by demand from the transport vehicles by hoisting not grow tall and straight and beautiful. Beyond of the marketplace rather than by a central author- cranes and immediately placed and fixed in these needs, higher levels of needs exist. These include ity”. Conversely, the push strategy is defined position on the site. Due to the exorbitant needs for understanding, esthetic appreciation and as “based upon forecasts rather than on specific cus- cost of transport helicopters, delivery by air purely spiritual needs. In the levels of the five basic tomer demand. The term is used in many fields to is usually practical only for extremely inac- needs, the person does not feel the second need until describe centralized decision-making authority with- cessible sites. Transport by road is standard the demands of the first have been satisfied, nor the out the immediate input of data from the market- procedure for continental travels and partic- third until the second has been satisfied, and so on. place”. Finally, a push/pull strategy is defined ularly distances up to 1000km, avoiding re- Maslow's basic needs are as follows. as “based upon the combination of forecasts and spe- peated and costly load transfers (cf. Staib, Physiological Needs - These are biological cific customer demand. For example, a manufacturer 2008). needs. They consist of needs for oxygen, food, water, might purchase component parts based upon sales and a relatively constant body temperature. They are forecasts, but manufacture finished products only 339 Larger elements eventually require the the strongest needs because if a person were deprived upon actual customers orders”. use of transport frames, transport spreader of all needs, the physiological ones would come first 343 The term was coined by B. J. Pine II beams or rope systems for securing hoisting in the person's search for satisfaction. (1993), who refers that MC solves the di- equipment. For example, heavyweight pre- Safety Needs - When all physiological needs cast reinforced concrete elements can be are satisfied and are no longer controlling thoughts lemma of offering individualized products at the price of standardized ones by eliminating manufactured complete with lifting lugs or and behaviors, the needs for security can become ac- inefficiencies and waste by ordering the pro- anchors for transportation and assembly, tive. Adults have little awareness of their security placed in the formwork during the manufac- needs except in times of emergency or periods of dis- ductive process (cf. Antonio Lopes Correia, turing process. organization in the social structure (such as wide- Murtinho, & Simões da Silva, 2011). 340 The notion of batch-size refers to how spread rioting). Children often display the signs of 344 Cf. Olhager (2003). many products can be made with a given insecurity and the need to be safe. 345 The make-to-stock is a typical MP strat- technology. It is typically used to establish Needs of Love, Affection and Belongingness - egy, hence where products ordered by cus- optimal relations between production vol- When the needs for safety and for physiological well- tomers are to be produced quickly with no ume and investment. For instance, a single being are satisfied, the next class of needs for love, customization. The order is made between pencil can be sharpen with a knife, but if, in- affection and belongingness can emerge. Maslow the final assembly and shipment. Typical ex- stead, a thousand pencils were to be states that people seek to overcome feelings of loneli- amples include beverages (e.g. beer, wine, sharpen, it would pay to buy an electric ness and alienation. This involves both giving and soft drinks), food products (e.g. canned food sharpener. If it were a million, probably it receiving love, affection and the sense of belonging. such as tomato or tuna, packed food such as would be better to equip with an automatic Needs for Esteem - When the first three classes sugar or flour), and health and beauty prod- feeding, gripping, and sharpening system, of needs are satisfied, the needs for esteem can become ucts. The typical speculative real estate also and to cope with pencils of different length dominant. These involve needs for both self-esteem broadly fits this category. and diameter, it would be better to have an and for the esteem a person gets from others. Hu- mans have a need for a stable, firmly based, high automated system with sensors to measure 346 The assemble-to-order is a strategy where level of self-respect, and respect from others. When pencil dimensions, sharpening pressure, and products are to be produced quickly while so on, in order to adapt to different pencils’ these needs are satisfied, the person feels self-confident allowing a small degree of customization. and valuable as a person in the world. When these characteristics. Thus, the choice of process Products are partially made-to-stock, i.e. stock needs are frustrated, the person feels inferior, weak, depends on the number and/or kind of pen- is buffered, but final assembly only takes cils that need to be sharpen, i.e. on the batch helpless and worthless. places after orders are received. Typical ex- Needs for Self-Actualization - When all of the size, and the best option is that one that amples include partial postponement of foregoing needs are satisfied, then and only then are costs least per pencil sharpened. paint color mixing, where the white base is the needs for self-actualization activated. Maslow de- made-to-stock, and the adjustments can 341 Cf. (Maslow, 1954). scribes self-actualization as a person's need to be and quickly be made on customer order. Dell Simons, Irwin, and Drinnin (1987) do that which the person was “born to do”. “A mu- computers makes use of large stocks, how- write: “Abraham Maslow developed a theory of sician must make music, an artist must paint, and ever final assembly is postponed until orders personality that has influenced a number of different a poet must write”. These needs make themselves felt are received. The historical concrete panel fields, due in part to its high level of practicality, ac- in signs of restlessness. The person feels on edge, tense, systems in the former USSR or in Germany curately describing many realities of personal experi- lacking something, in short, restless. If a person is broadly fit this category. Assemble-to-order and ences. Maslow is a humanistic psychologist, and thus hungry, unsafe, not loved or accepted, or lacking self- made-to stock distinction can thus be tenuous, did not believe that human beings are pushed and esteem, it is very easy to know what the person is nevertheless it is from its threshold that the pulled by mechanical forces, either of stimuli and re- restless about. It is not always clear what a person orientation of the push-pull boundary is set. inforcements (behaviorism) or of unconscious instinc- wants when there is a need for self-actualization”. In last resort, the push-pull boundary will be tual impulses (psychoanalysis). Humanists focus upon potentials. They believe that humans strive for 342 Whereas the product-push brings the

328

and what are the consequences are funda- 358 Cf. Balakrishnan (1991). defined by the difference of buffer stock. mental questions in traditional risk assess- 359 Cf. K. T. Ulrich and Eppinger (2012). ment (RA), which has become a discipline in 347 The make-to-order is typically associated its own right, dealing with highly complex with custom-built products, such as tailored 360Cf. K. Ulrich (1995) subjects amid uncertainty and vagueness. clothing or jewelry. Make-to-order strategy The concept has too been applied to con- 361 Cf. Greven and Baldauf (2007), Cf. may typically be pursued by producers of struction, where selecting an appropriate International Standards Organization high cost products requiring excessive in- technique for evaluating the uncertainty as- (1983). ventory carrying cost of finished product. sociated with a specific project is critical (cf. Aircraft producers illustrate it, since rela- 362 Cf. Greven and Baldauf (2007). Chen, 2008). Risk factors are beyond the tively minor changes can be required by spe- control of the construction organizations, 363 Cf. K. T. Ulrich and Eppinger (2012). cific customers; nonetheless, production of yet the underlying idea sustaining RA mod- parts is postponed until after orders are re- els is that they can be managed, and are rel- 364 Cf. K. Ulrich (1995). ceived. atively predictable and measurable by ade- 365 Cf. Alexander (1964). 348 Engineer-to-order is pretty much self-ex- quate statistics. Construction risk planatory, with totally custom-designed assessment (CRA) typically deals with man- 366 Cf. Simon (1996). agement aspects that consider the entire products fitting the category. 367 Cf. Sosa, Eppinger, and Rowles (2007). AEC industry related aspects and not just a 349 Cf. Womack and Jones (2003). portion of it. These are naturally more con- 368 In graph terminology, the node is a rep- 350 The path towards LT was begun in cerned with potential hazardous circum- resentation of a thing or component, and so Toyota in the aftermath of WWII, when, in stances that may have financial impacts in forth. An edge is a connection between a pair the 1960s, a company executive, Taiichi the overall process, than directly with archi- of nodes, thus presuming that a relation be- Ohno (b.1912-d.1990), sought to optimize tectural design issues. Of the few of these tween both nodes is established. The degree production processes within the company, that may be analyzed in an overall CRA, ar- of a node is the number of edges incident developing the famous Toyota Production Sys- chitectural design related issues are typically with it—a degree 0 means it is an isolate node, tem (TPS). Back then, America was impres- left in secondary stances, as overall construc- a degree 1 means it is an end-node. Note that sively producing vehicles and aircrafts, tion risks depend a lot more on decisions the sum of all the node-degrees is an even which in essence used the Fordist and Tay- taken upstream. number, since we must count twice the lorist methods, making use of principles of Different CRA categories are used for dif- number of edges. This essentially results economies of scale, integrating the incep- ferent purposes, and different methodolo- from Euler’s 1736 handshaking lemma, im- tions of automation in their assembly lines, gies can be used. Among these, it can be plying that if n people shake hands, the and so forth. Ohno fundamentally at- found not only the indicators, but also handshakes must be 2n, thus even (cf. R. J. tempted to adapt these principles to the Jap- weighted analysis, or proposals for mitiga- Wilson, 1996). A path is a sequence of con- anese culture, where from he could regard tion measures. Some authors classify it into nected nodes, and the path length is the corre- the Fordist way with new eyes. The resulting external risks (referent to a different country sponding number of edges on it. A geodesic TPS system was since highly acclaimed, re- from where it is originated) and internal risks (or distance) is the shortest path between two ceiving awards around the globe for its focus (referent to the country where it is origi- nodes in a network of nodes, measured by on people, through the use of economies of nated), others have more detailed categories, the corresponding path length. A graph is scope. The innovative methodology of pro- e.g. political, financial, market, intellectual connected when every pair of nodes is con- duction organization would become a refer- property, social, safety, and so on, of which nected. A bridge is when if removing a node, ence, with several other industries since be- it can be categorized within different scopes we disconnect the original graph. The center ginning to use it as a production model (client, contractor, etc.). The typology of of a connected graph is the node, or set of towards their own practices. risks seems to depend most if a project is lo- nodes, with the smallest maximum distance cal or international. Internal risks are com- to all other nodes in the graph (i.e. of mini- 351 Ohno first identified seven muda types, mon to both, while external are normally mum eccentricity). A star graph is when however more can probably be found as it is more sensible to aspects such as unaware- there is one node connecting with several pointed out by Womack and Jones (2003): ness of social conditions, economic and po- nodes, which connect only with the first and mistakes which require rectification; produc- litical scenarios, regulatory framework, and no other. When the edges of a graph are tion of items no one wants, with inventories so on353. Data collection for these is not an noted with arrows, we can call it a digraph (or and remaindered goods piling up; process easy task, as multiple sources have to be con- directed graph). In these conditions, be- steps which are not actually needed; move- sidered in the target region, although some tween each pair of nodes there can be three ment of employees and transport of goods authors have a particular concern in provid- types of directed connections: adirectional from one place to another without any pur- ing general methodologies for this particular (simple connection), unidirectional and bidirec- pose; groups of people in a downstream ac- problem (cf. Hastak, et al.,2000), and the tional. A multi-edge is when there is more than tivity standing around waiting because an same may, apply to areas other than RA or one edge connecting a pair of nodes. Each upstream activity has not delivered on time; CRA. edge of a multi-edge connection can be goods and services which do not meet cli- noted with any of the directed connection 354 Cf. Antonio Lopes Correia, Murtinho, ent’s needs. (cf. Womack & Jones, 2003). types (cf. Ruohonen, 2013). and Simões da Silva (2017). 352 An internal study revealed that about 80 369 Cf. Agrawal (2009). percent of the variety being offered by the 355 Cf. Swamidass (2000). 370 Cf. Sanchez and Mahoney (1996). implemented MC process was only corre- 356 Cf. Pahl, Wallace, Blessing, and Pahl sponding to 20 percent of sales. (2007), K. Ulrich (1994), K. T. Ulrich and 371 In brief, symmetry is when some aspect 353 Other kinds of risks have been thor- Eppinger (2012). of an object stays the same despite the oughly scrutinized. What can go wrong, 357 Cf. Alexander (1964). what is the likelihood that it will go wrong

329 stood by the different parts that may be di- is affordable is subject to national interpretations. changes. In other words, it is a type of invar- rectly or indirectly involved. Indeed, from a The most common notion of affordable housing im- iance, i.e. the property that something does societal point of view, the approach towards plies that households that spend more than 30% of not change under a set of transformations. innovation in housing construction tends to their gross income to obtain adequate and appropri- For instance, a sphere has rotational sym- be conservative, since it is an activity that re- ate housing have an affordability problem. Neverthe- metry, insofar as when rotated about its cen- quires heavy investment, as it is clearly no- less, this definition is far from being universally ac- ter it maintains its appearance. A Rorschke- ticeable in the weight that housing expense cepted, and poses questions on which costs should be lach inkblot has reflectional symmetry, since typically plays in family bills, draining the included (such as for instance whether to consider its mirror image matches the original. In 3D, greatest bulk of the income. utilities bills). According to Eurostat’s definition, a a screw axis—or rotary translation—has an household is considered ‘overburdened’ when the total 379 Worldwide there are different formulas, helical symmetry, thus combining rotation housing costs ('net' of housing allowances) represent using different criteria, to calculate property and translation symmetries, which can be more than 40 % of disposable income ('net' of hous- price or affordability indexes. There are di- observed in common objects such as drill ing allowances), where housing costs include mortgage verse targets and diverse insights, for in- bits, augers or springs. Also in 3D, a rotary or housing loans interest payments for owners and stance, the concept may be used for pur- reflection, combines a rotation about an axis rent payments for tenants. Utilities (water, electricity, chase or rent purposes, addressed by the with a reflection in a plane perpendicular to gas and heating) and any costs related to regular real-estate, the construction, or financial sec- that axis, as is the case of the antiprisms. In maintenance and structural insurance are likewise tor, and can be a useful macro-economic or geometry, symmetry occurs when there is a included” (Pittini, 2012: 2). ‘transformation’ or ‘operation’—technically, political instrument. For instance, in the an isometry or affine map—mapping an ob- USA, the National Association of Realtors 380 Indeed, real-estate terms sum it up elo- ject onto itself, meaning there is an invari- (NAR), publishes a housing affordability in- quently when often affirming that ‘location ance under the proceeded transformation. dex. Their methodology, including compu- is everything’. In fact, although not depart- The Euclidean group of isometries figure tation and criteria, basically measures ing from the construction cost, but from the among the most commonly aknowledged whether or not a typical family could qualify selling price point of view, many current 2 and straighforwardly recognizable of these for a mortgage loan on a typical home: “To real-estate procurement methods use the m operations, consisting of reflections, rota- interpret the indices, a value of 100 means that a price approach as a comparison means be- tions, translations, or combinations of these. family with the median income has exactly enough tween different products to their prospec- Scaling, which is another commonly income to qualify for a mortgage on a median-priced tive buyers. home. An index above 100 signifies that family aknowledged geometric operation, can too 381 Nonetheless, given the nature of the ar- earning the median income has more than enough in- be considered an isometry, meaning that if chitectural task, any solution will ultimately come to qualify for a mortgage loan on a median- an object is expanded or reduced in size, the have some degree of dependence from a cer- priced home, assuming a 20 percent down payment. new object retains the same properties as the tain subjective interpretation. original. Notwithstanding, this does not ap- (…) The calculation assumes a down payment of 20 ply to most physical systems, where a change percent of the home price and it assumes a qualifying 382 Cf. Murtinho et al. (2009). of scale typically implies structural or mor- ratio of 25 percent. That means the monthly P&I 383 There are different ways to understand phological changes. payment cannot exceed 25 percent of the median family monthly income” (cf. NAR, 2014). Also this setting, considering either the common 372 Cf. Schilling and Hill (1998). in the US, the National Association of Home circulation areas or the circulation within Builders (NAHB) publishes Ranks and quar- each space. In a certain room, the distribu- 373 Cf. Schilling and Hill (1998). terly Press Releases on housing affordability tion of furniture, doors and windows dimen- 374 Cf. Agrawal (2009). (cf. NAHB, 2014). In Australia, the Housing sions and location, and so forth, influences Industry Association (HIA) also publishes reg- how circulation can be made within that 375 Cf. Salingaros and Tejada (2001). ular reports on house prices and housing af- room, and how much area is in the least necessary for it. A proper handling of the circu- 376 Cf. Vitor Murtinho et al. (2010); V. fordability. Working at worldwide scale, the lation zones within a so considered enclosed Murtinho et al. (2010a); Murtinho et al. NUMBEO user contributed database on cit- space may bring substantial area savings. By (2009). ies and countries worldwide, provides information on world living conditions including increasing the degree of embedded design 377 Cf. Santos et al. (2010). cost of living, housing indicators (including within a space may bring area savings. How- affordability index), health care, traffic, ever, as shown by Leupen (cf. 2006), such 378 Among the different national pro- crime and pollution. They provide a com- has a reverse effect in polyvalence, under- posals, it would later become clear that the prehensive of their methodology and corre- mining important spatial flexibility aspects. better outcomes came from those works in- spondent codification (cf. NUMBEO, For instance, a shelf that folds down to a volving greater architectural weight. As gen- 2014). At a European level, recent docu- bed, while expanding the possibilities of use erally acknowledged by the different repre- mentation on the theme has been published of space, lowers the potential for change, sentatives attending the general meetings, it in 2012 by the CECODHAS Housing Eu- and so forth. Space may ‘augment’ turned out that the challenges posed by ar- rope’s Observatory. Their definition too through multifunctional furniture and the chitecturally driven concepts produced acknowledges the relativity and context-sen- like, but then it is also difficult to change more attractive proposals. To a certain ex- sitivity of the housing affordability concept, the spatial layout throughout the building’s tent this means that this sort of proposals which measured against economic variables life. While ‘freeing’ space in this fashion, end up becoming a key driver for the differ- such as GDP, purchasing power, and so on. we are also ‘imprisoning’ it. ent engineering expertise’s, challenging However, it also refers that a common way There are plenty of validated functional them and thereby making them evolve to address it is to consider the percentage of studies that have long set clear definitions in throughout. On a different perspective, this income that a household is spending on this particular, to the point of influencing the also signals a social acceptability predisposi- housing costs. A few options are described: different legal frameworks in different nation to accept innovation, if such innovation “Despite consensus across Europe on housing afford- tional or regional contexts, and which in any is properly contextualized, and thus under- ability being increasingly stretched, the idea of what

330

Some are fundamentally derived from con- 396 Cf. Baudrillard (1994). case the design necessarily had to comply. In structive concerns (e.g. Manning Portable Cot- 397 As many other terms, globalization the case of the Portuguese legal framework, tage, H. Manning, 1837). RGEU (acronym for ‘General Regulation Some others are made to sell via cata- does not have a consensual definition. Defi- nitions on globalization vary from the for Buildings and Urbanizations’) is, among logues, fulfilling wishes borrowed from knowledge field, group or scholar who pro- others, a key legal documents in this respect. flashy colored pages (e.g. Alladin Ready-Cut For instance, it sets minimum areas for the Houses, 1906), and have no architectural as- vides it, as is easily verifiable in a quick browse on some of the abundant literature different house areas according to their ty- pirations whatsoever. available. For instance, in a Google Scholar pologies, establishing limits on room pro- There are even those that do not expect portions in relation to a direct source of light becoming much more than prototypes, to be search conducted on March 2012 there was a return of over 1.5 million entries for the and ventilation, and so forth. An overview questioned, desired and dreamt about (e.g. word in scholarly books and articles. A quick of the Portuguese legal framework was one Keck Crystal House, George Fred Keck, 1933- of the delivered elements in the first stage of 34). browse on the search results also reveals the wide variety of subjects portrayed within the the AHP. A few others, are fundamentally con- thematic. Herod (2009: 231-233) points out ceived as a design system, a grammar to con- 384 Cf. full project in the provided digital vey a style of making (e.g. Usonian Houses, that outlining a term such as globalization documentation. may seem an intellectual luxury, but it can Frank Lloyd Wright, 1936-onwards). also be quite relevant, as “ideas, rhetorics, and 385 Cf. full project in the provided digital Some take it to the level of corporate material practices all have real consequences for real documentation. brand (e.g. BoKlok, from joint-venture of IKEA and Skanska companies, 1996-pre- people”. 386 For instance, when compared with the sent). 398 Eco (1991: 132). Portuguese minimum requirements for ty- Soon it becomes clear that the diversity pological labelling (i.e. T0 meaning zero bed- of examples and their different connecting 399 Lévi-Strauss writes: “Throughout my life, room, T1 meaning one bedroom, and so dots makes any attempt of classification vir- this search was probably a predominant interest of on), these are astoundingly bigger, since the tually impossible. mine. When I was a child, for a while my main in- minimums for inhabitable areas are set in: terest was geology. The problem in geology is also to T0≥22m2 (gross ≥35m2), T1≥30.5m2 (gross 392 Nonetheless, there are prefab examples try to understand what is invariant in the tremen- ≥52m2), T2≥43.5m2 (gross ≥72m2), in which technological aspects stand-out. dous diversity of landscapes, that is, to be able to re- T3≥54.5m2 (gross ≥91m2), T4≥61m2 (gross Such is the case of the Ballon Frame (1833- duce a landscape to a finite number of geological lay- ≥105m2), T5≥74m2 (gross ≥122m2), present), developed from a mixture of needs ers and of geological operations. Later as an T6≥82.5m2 (gross ≥134m2). These figures and improvements, such as small, light- adolescent, I spent a great part of my leisure time are generally smaller than what can be cur- weight, wood parts (easier to handle in drawing costumes and sets for opera. The problem rently found in the real-estate market for transport and assembling), and added to there is exactly the same - to try to express in one houses in apartment buildings. Exceptions other technological breakthroughs such as language, that is, the language of graphic arts and stand in the smaller typologies T0 and T1, the industrialization of nail production. It painting, something which also exists in music and where these figures seem to approximate. even become an iconic construction system in the libretto; that is, to try to reach the invariant On the other hand, if comparing with real- throughout the USA (and beyond), enabling property of a very complex set of codes (the musical estate market for residential houses, the dis- an immense variety of styles and architec- code, the literary code, the artistic code). The problem proportion is a lot bigger, with figures such tural layouts, still lasting presently. is to find what is common to all of them. It's a prob- as T1~100m2, T2~130m2, T3~175m2, lem, one might say, of translation, of translating 393 High-density materials, such as brick or T4~230m2, T5~265m2, or T6~370m2. Ad- concrete, have a higher thermal mass, which what is expressed in one language - or one code, if ditionally, in this niche we are talking of you prefer, but language is sufficient - into expression gives it more inertia to temperature changes, great variations that can go all the way from in a different language” (Lévi-Strauss, 1979: 8- absorbing and storing heat and releasing it over 30m2 until little over 300m2 in the T3, slower than lower thermal mass materials 9). or from over 80m2 until little over 400m2 in such as wood or insulation foam. the T4. 400 Eco (1991: 331) writes: “the codes… would then be nothing more than iconological, stylis- 394 Excepting more extreme climates, as a 387 Cf. Lobos and Donath (2010). rule of thumb, aiming at higher thermal tic or rhetorical lexicons. They offer no generative possibilities, but finished schemata, not open forms 388 Cf. Stiny (2006). mass is most effective when ranges exceed about which one could talk, but hardened forms, gen- 10ºC, whereas in a 7º-10ºC it depends on the 389 Cf. V. Murtinho et al. (2010b);V. climate (in tropical climates can cause dis- eral relations of an unexpected type. Architecture is Murtinho et al. (2010a). comfort unless carefully designed, with insu- thus rhetoric (…)”. 390 Cf. António Lopes Correia, Silva, and lation and shades), and 6ºC is insufficient Cf. 401 Such triadic understanding is was put in Murtinho (2012); Antonio Lopes Correia, Reardon, McGee, and Milne (2013). these terms by Adolf Loos’ Architecture essay (cf. Opel & Opel, 2002). The triadic notion Simões da Silva, and Murtinho (2013). 395 For instance, optimal zones in masonry also denotes Hegelian foundations, of which 391 From the examples that, in one way or materials are located in the first 100mm, whereas in wood they are in the first 25mm. Charles S. Pierce triadic sign, with object, sign another, have been inscribed in an ‘official and interpretant, is a key semiotic reference. architectural history’, some strongly assume Nonetheless, there are already available mar- a conceptual intention, which will, or will ket solutions, namely the new phase change 402 Tafuri (1976: 181). not be used in later developments (e.g. Mai- materials, aiming to increase the thermal 403 Cf. Norberg-Schulz (1980). son Dom-Ino, 1914 and later Maison Citrohan, mass of lightweight constructions without 1920, by Le Corbusier). significantly increasing weight, which can be 404 Harvey (2005: 240) writes: “As space ap- incorporated in buildings, although with in- Other examples, while conceptual, con- pears to shrink to a global village of telecommuni- vey a deep architectural sensibility and de- herent costs. sign focus (e.g. Espansiva, Jørn Utzon, 1969).

331

its shapes. There is even a trend of travelling 418 Issues affecting local forces are case of cations and a spaceship earth of economic and eco- experience niche market, where the tourist tension between anti-global and pro-global logical interdependencies and as time horizons can spend the night in the slum’s hotel, or forces, have been widely scrutinized, as is shorten to the point where the present is all there is, join a slum-like resort: ‘third-world’ roman- the case of the architectural regionalism de- so we have to learn how to cope with an overwhelming ticism with luxury service. bate. sense of compression of our spatial and temporal Regionalism was never a singular theory worlds. The experience of time-space compression is 409 Cf. Le Corbusier (2007). or practice but is most often a means by challenging, exciting, stressfull, and sometimes deeply 410 (Lévi-Strauss, 1979: 20) writes: “Differ- which tensions, such as those between glob- troubling, capable of sparking, therefore, a diversity ences are extremely fecund. It is only through differ- alization and localism, modernity and tradi- of social, cultural, and political responses” (Harvey, ence that progress has been made. What threatens us tion, are addressed. Its origins are remote in 2005: 240). right now is probably what we may call over-commu- time, becoming particularly clear with the Roman practices of territorial management 405 Scheuerman (2010) writes: “The human nication – that is, the tendency to know exactly in – the regionalism of Vitruvius. It may be al- experience of space is intimately connected to the tem- one point of the world what is going on in all other lied with other disciplines concerned with poral structure of those activities by means of which parts of the world. In order for a culture to be really spatial phenomena such as cultural geogra- we experience space. Changes in the temporality of itself and to produce something, the culture and its phy or historical studies, but differs from human activity inevitably generate altered experi- members must be convinced of their originality and these in dimension and application. “Water- ences of space or territory. Theorists of globalization even, to some extent, of their superiority over the oth- sheds, topographical difference, areas of distinctive disagree about the precise sources of recent shifts in ers; it is only under conditions of under-communica- land use, climatological difference, and consistencies the spatial and temporal contours of human life. tion that it can produce anything. We are now of architectural, cultural, linguistic, and political or- Nonetheless, they generally agree that alterations in threatened with the prospect of our being only con- ganization are criteria available to the regionalist for humanity's experiences of space and time are work- sumers, able to consume anything from any point in consideration in the design of environments for those ing to undermine the importance of local and even the world and from any culture, but of losing all orig- places. Further, thinking in terms of regions affords national boundaries in many arenas of human en- inality. architects the opportunity to derive unique and rele- deavor”. We can easily now conceive of a time when there vant environments from a specific and local context A classic example of the changes in hu- will be only one culture and one civilization on the with a wider perspective” (Canizaro, 2007: 18- manity’s experiences of space-time through entire surface of the earth. I don't believe this will 19). Architectural regionalism differs from global effects is the shifting of the boundary happen, because there are contradictory tendencies al- other disciplines with that concern (e.g. cul- conditions which have been archetypally de- ways at work - on the one hand towards homogeni- tural studies, sociology, anthropology) fun- fining the idea of country or nation inherited zation and on the other towards new distinctions. damentally in its relation to practice. Unlike since the French Revolution: in one hand, The more a civilization becomes homogenized, the processes of analysis and description used the nation-state is overwhelmed by transna- more internal lines of separation become apparent; by these, which tends to be more neutral, tional forces, on the other it is inescapably and what is gained on one level is immediately lost practice tends to be polemical and its theo- depending on its very social scrutiny. on another”. rization, prescriptive. (cf. Canizaro, 2007). According to Rodrik (2012), the global 411 GLA (2013). financial crisis unleashed in the late 2000’s 419 Montaner (2002). seems to have shattered the myth that na- 412 NYC (2013). tional policymakers are largely powerless in 420 Cf. Norberg-Schulz (1980); Canizaro 413 INSEE (2010). the face of global markets: “For now, people (2007). still must turn for solutions to their national govern- 414 The heterotopia concept is also not ments, which remain the best hope for collective ac- consensual, yet is certainly a conceptual in- 421 Cf. Benjamin (2008). tion. The nation-state may be a relic bequeathed to strument that helps explaining spatial deriv- 422 Cf.Klingmann (2007). us by the French Revolution, but it is [yet] all that atives of globalization processes. First we have”. In any case, if this return to the coined by Foucault (1967), the notion is set 423 OMA, Koolhaas, and Mau (1995: 364- state, as the last credible warranty, may be between what may be called the real space 365) true in (at least) economic-wise and although and the utopian, or unreal space, carrying a 424 Dias (2003: 6) writes: “by definition, archi- in counter-cycle with a certain common be- sense of abnormality within a seemingly nor- tecture has always been transnational, interna- lief of how things evolve (that is on the path mality, a sense of otherness in a familiar en- tional, cosmopolitan”. And indeed, “the Rom- of blending and while economically grow- vironment, and so on, including heterogene- anesque, the Gothic, the Renascence, the Baroque, ing), it is socially certainly very far away from ity within homogeneity and vice-versa. the Neo-Classical, the International Style are all what is given to observe in (at least) power- modes, more or less known by everyone, more or ful social movements that were only made 415 Cf. Augé (1995). less mastered by all, for in any place, and acknowl- possible some by globalization by-products, 416 Other kinds of non-places can be found edging them stylistically and constructively, build sev- such as the ones that enabled the so-called among those spaces where some important eral types of programs”. Arab Spring unleashed in early 2011. That is forms of private interaction are manifested, to say the state, again (and accidentally) rele- as those purposefully designed to house cer- 425 Opel and Opel (2002: 76-77). vant, is now more than ever entangled be- tain socially-stigmatized behaviors—e.g. 426 Cf. Kostof (1986). tween powerful global economic forces and prostitutes, homeless, or addicted—provid- powerful social forces globally driven. ing them with a bit more of dignity than they 427 The diversity of attempted frames of 406 Virilio (2000: 101). would get in the streets. reference is abundant. For instance, Frankl (cf. 1968) distinguishes between the spatial 417 Eldemery (2009: 344) writes: “place exists 407 Frampton (2007a: 85). form of the buildings and the corporeal (physi- not only physically but also in peoples’ minds as cal building elements, mass, surface), visual 408 A relatively recent trend of artistic pro- memories. The identity of a specific place becomes in- (light, shadow, color), and purposive (social jects has given visibility to their forms, teresting when it brings about a certain experience, showcased in cinema, exhibitions or TV evoking associations or memories”. commercials, inspiring a certain ‘coolness’ to

332

proportionalità (1573), Wendel Dietterlin’s & Cole, 2011). function) qualities that result from the phys- (1550-1599) Architectura (1593) (cf. 'Pal- 446 To describe the idea, Wilson once told ical realization of spatial form; Le Corbusier ladio's', 2010). (cf. 1986) famously makes an appraisal on the story of a friend female soul singer who space, light, air and order, from where the im- 434 Cf. Kostof (1986). called him just right after 9/11, saying she could not perform in her show as scheduled, age of buildings suspended by pilotis in the 435 Cf. 'Palladian' (2010). middle of an idyllic green city immediately because she felt so affected that she sensed arises: everything in its right place (as the Radio- 436 (Davies, 2005: 118). that if she had to sing that night she would head song of the Kid A album (2000) trans- Davies adds: “From John Shute’s First and just burst into tears. Wilson told her that if mits, Everything in its right place as the obses- Chief Croundes of Architecture of 1563 to the lavish she felt that way, the best was just to sing siveness of human logic, the madness of publications of the eighteenth century, such as Colen anyway, no matter what. She sang indeed, taking it to extremes). Vitruvius (1914: 17; Campbell’s Vitruvius Britanicus (1715-25) and but soon after starting, she could not do it i.e. Book I, Chapter 3, #2) had expressed a James Gibb’s A Book of Architecture (1728). The anymore, and she just kept silent. She stood triad of firmitatis (durability), utilitatis (con- builders of the elegant streets and squares of Geor- there for minutes and eventually tears came venience) and venustatis (beauty). gian London took their correctly proportioned fa- into her eyes, but she kept silent. While she çades and Doric door-cases straight from smaller, was standing silent in stage, nothing more 428 Frampton (2007a: 86) writes: “As a re- cheaper pattern books such as William Halfpenny’s than her solid presence - no sound, no sult of these successive global disturbances it became The Art of Sound Building (1725) and Batty movement, no expression, just her and the increasingly clear that modernization, most fre- Langley’s The Builder’s Jewel (1741). In the early deepness of her feelings - one by one, all the quently personified in architecture by the white, ab- nineteenth century dozens of architects produced pat- audience started to cry. stract rationality of the International Style, would tern books to meet the demand from a growing mid- 447 Within it, the Futurama, the General not come into being overnight as a brave new world, dle class for suburban villas and country cottages. but would instead be subject to an infinite series of Motors pavilion, immersed its visitors in a One of the pioneers of the so-called ‘villa book’ was diorama of miniature towns, individually de- reversals and deviations, not to mention the sporadic Sir John Soane (…) His Sketches in Architecture signed homes, highways, vehicles, water- violent conflicts at both local and global scale that of 1793 is purely speculative, containing designs for will be fought in its name”. ways and trees of diverse species, a colored modest, affordable dwellings pictured in imaginary 3D illustration of a fast-moving neoliberal 429 Cf. Jencks (2002). rural settings” (Davies, 2005: 117-118). philosophy. 437 Cf. Colomina (1998). 430 Cf. 'Palladio's Literary Predecessors' 448 Cf. Fletcher (1987). (2010), Kostof (1986), Wittkower (1995). 438 Cf. Ábalos (2003). 449 The company Grupo OAS, owner of 431 Cf. Wittkower (1995: 26-37). 439 Cf. Gutman (1988). some of the stadiums, has struggled for months with the impact of a corruption 432 Cf. 'Palladio and Britain' (2011), 440 Cf. Ahlava (2002). scandal at major oil company Petrobras, 'Palladio's Literary Predecessors' (2010), which undercut the builder’s access to fi- Wittkower (1995). 441 Nevertheless, the notion of starchitecture seems to be in process of review, as ambig- nancing. Facing cash flow problems, Grupo OAS begun to search for buyers for the to- 433 Other include e.g.: Francesco di Gior- uously and paradoxically affirmed by the tality of Arena das Dunas (in Natal, Rio gio’s (1439-1502) Trattati di Architettura starchitect Rem Koolhaas while curator of Grande do Norte), and for 50% of the Arena (1476-1492); Fra Luca Pacioli’s (1445-1517) the 14th Venice Bienalle in 2014, with Funda- Fonte Nova (in Salvador da Baía). This is just De divina Proportione (1509), Diego de Sa- mentals as general theme, stating that what one of the many unfortunate stories involv- gredo’s (1490-1528) Medidas del Romano mattered was architecture, not its author- (1526), Torello Sarayna’s De origine et amplitu- ship—indeed, when backs are covered, it is ing each of the twelve stadiums in the post- World Cup. The ground in Cuiaba was dine civitatis Veronae (1540), Antonio Laba- easy to say anything. cco’s (1495-1570) Libro di Antonio Labacco closed because of structural problems, and appartenente a l’Architettura nel qual si figurano 442 Making use of their expertise they claim other venues have seen bigger crowds for re- alcune notabili antiquità di Roma (1552), Pitro to sell their services for multiple consultancy ligious events or music concerts than for Cataneo’s (1510-1574) I quattro primi libri di purposes such as corporate identity or visual football (cf. Downie, 2015). Architettura di Pietro Cataneo Senese (1554, communication, operating in areas such as 450 Rittel and Webber (1973). 1567), Alvise Cornaro’s (1484-1556) Trattato media, politics, sociology, renewable energy, dell’Architettura (1557-1566; published pos- technology, fashion, curating, publishing or 451 Cf. Koolhaas (1994). thumously), Vignola’s (1507-1573) Regola graphic design. delli cinque ordini dell’Architettura (1562), Fra 452 Herman Hertzberger (2000: 199). 443 Cf. Kostof (1986). Anton Francesco Doni’s (1513-1574) Le ville 453 Cf. Kunstler (2004). (1566), Philibert De l’Orme’s (1514-1570) 444 Tafuri (1976: ix-x). Le premier tome de l’Architecture de Philibert de l’Orme (1567), Silvio Belli’s Della proportione, et 445 (Cf. Robinson, Jamieson, Worthington,

333